T^ J« -i ...,. ot ** ®'''''^^ff'«'^ ^a,.,; £<»'' ^ PRINCETON, N. J. '""S Presented by Mr. Samuel Agnew of Philadelphia, Pa. SCJ-i^l- AgJiciu Colt, on Baptism, No. ■n 7 • AN I N Q U I R Y, PROVING INFANT-BAPTISM . TO BE UNTENABLE, AS WELL FROM THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT, AS FROM THE SCRIPTURES AT LARGE. CONTAINING ALSO AN IMPARTIAL INVESTIGATION OF THE PRINCIPLES WHICH BIND CHRISTIANS TO UNITE AND FORBEAR WITH ONE ANOTHER. BY SWINTON'^LAWRIE, ED IX BURGH. Nullius addictus jurare in verba magistri. HoR, Ee not ye called master, for one is your master, even Christ-, and all ye are brethren. Matt, xxiii. 8, EDINBUKGH ; PRTNTKD BY J. RITCHIE. J. OCA v., J. &'- J. ROBERTSOK, AN'I> A. BLACK, EDINBURGH; M. OGLE, GLASGOW ; T. HAMILTON, AND R. OGLE, LONDON, 1810. INTRODUCTION x\. FRIEND of mine, happening lately to fall in with one who was proposing to publish a book to the world, inquired what was the motive he had in view ? whe° ther pro/it or Jame, or both ? To which the intended author promptly replied, that he trusted it was neither, but uti/itT/ alone. Now, though this be not the place to indulge in commendations either of men or of things, but simplj to give an account of what is intended in the following sheets ; jet the sentiment drawn forth bj the above interrogation is so~ unquestionablj just and proper in itself, that we cannot but take the libertj to approve of it, and to wish, in our turn likewise, froui the bottom of our heart, that, having a similar objec?: in view, we were more and more under its influence. What, alas? are all the empty titles, 'the vain and perishing honours or wealth which a world can bestow, compared with the condition of a benefactor of man- kind ■? To live, not to himself, but to God, is the glo-. ry of a Chriijtian ; and to spend the few years which ire allotted hiiJEX in this;^orld of sin aad misery, not for the aggrandizement of himself, not-to purchase himself IV INTRODUCTION. a name amongst his brethren, but really to be useful to them, in one way or other, is what he ought continual- ly to have in view. As to the particular subject of the following inquiry, 1 am well aware, that prejudice against it runs exceed- ingly high in many of my brethren ; and that it has been no uncommon thing to talk of some who have lately seen it their duty to change their sentiments in regard to it, as if their imagination were disordered, and of others, as if their situation were such as to lay them under a kind of constraint to act as they do. Whether or not these objections, as they apply to others, be well or ill founded, it is not for xne to decide ; but in as far as they may be brought against myself, I cer- tainly feel concerned to remove every thing of the kind, particularly as 1 conceive it to be truth, and not the petty interests of a private individual, that are here at stake. In answer, therefore, to the first insinuation respect- ing a disordered state of ^ the mind, without passing en- comiums more or less, a thing rathfer indelicate in one xvho is personally concerned, the following inquiry is humbly referred to, as a criterion whereby any one may judge of this matter. Nor is it less a matter of thankfulness to an independent mind, to be in a situa- tion independent of any one, God alone e;!^cepted, so that he might be under no temptation of espousing any principle but such as flows from the deliberate con- viction of his own mind. Such, I am happy to say, i , my situation, though I by no means intend to boast of it as being great of flattering in itself: 'but only, as it renders me independent of all others, save of liim in whom I live, move, and have my being ;. so, whatever be my views, I boldly declare that a depwident situa- tion can never be urged against me as the cause of iNTRODUCTION. V Xiiy change, as I know it to have been done againsh iome others *. There is jet another advantage which I now hap- pen to possess, tiie lacic of which has been bitterly complained of,' and perhaps too justly, in others, and this is, the giving ones-seli time to investigate the sub- ject with coolness and Jdeliberation. It is ^ow several years since my mind was led, in a providential manner, presently to be related, to attend particularly to the sub- ject ; and though, during that period, I have had a multiplicity of objects to engage my attention, yet I trust that the views contained in the following investi- gation, will not only manifest my attention to this one ii\ particular, but warrant .ihe with some grace in submit- ting the result to the public. The manner in which I was led to the cansideratio i of this subject was simply as follows, i let it be dbserved, that I am not ashamed to acicuov/- ledge myself to have been trained up from my infancy, and to have professed when I came to years, the prin- ciples of Pedo-baptists ; and from all that I could col- lect either from readuig or meditation, gcc. I conceived * The idea in regard to situation, miiy be e-rtended beyond a merely dependent one. -When a person's situation has bfer. thought to be uncomfortable, when his aifairs, eUher in ■ the worJLd, or the church,- have been in <'ol'/ea in psrplexii , ..^ wheahe-waJyatpprehensixte, tljai 1 be made a suljccL ui' discipline, in any or all ot thctc <,a=:b, a change is considered as necessary ; and let the unhappy subject, under such circuinstaucci, though they be not real but supposed only, turn to v/bat hand ho may, still judgment, or rational and personal conviction are sup- posed to have no part j but he is considered as being necessarilv driven tq the change as the last shift by which he might emanci- pate himself out of all his difficulties. Though, indeed,. it be- comes noni^ fo be high fttinded buttofedr,\t\%ytt\\'\ih pecU-Ui' satisfaction thit 1 can plead an exsiDption fron^ all the above evils. vx INTRODUCTION. that I held those principles upon the most tenable grounds. One day, however, as I happened to be read- ing Dr Macknight's view of the Abrahamic covenant, without the smallest reference to the subject of baptism, (the Doctor indeed never raentioning it, and to my mind it was the most distant at the time), I could not help being struck with the following quotations, John viii.SS. Ptom. iv. 16. ix. 8. But as they occur in the course of the Doctor's reasoning, I presume it will be neces- sarj to give it at large. Speaking of the promises given to Abral»am respecting his seed, after some re- marks upon the original ex]Dressions, he says, that ' he ' (Abraham' namely), was to be the father of many ' nations by the constitution or appointment of God j * and that he was to be so exceedingly fruitful by pro- * creating children, that nations were to be made of him, " and kings were to come out of him. In this diversi-. * ty of expression, God intimated to Abraham, that he « was to have two kinds of seed ; one by the constitu- « tioii oi; appointment of God, in respect of which he * Vv-as to be a father of many tiatiofis j and another by * liStuv?.! descent, in respect of which he was to be ex' '" cealing^ fruitful in children. This account of Abra- * liam's seed merits attention, because the pA)raises in ' the covenant being made, not to Abraham alone, but ' to Iris seed, in their first or literal meaning they be- ' lor.ged to his natural seed, but in their second or high-' * est meaning, they were promises to liis seed by faith. « The distinction of Abraham's seed into two kinds, * is intimated*;by our Loe4 ^himself, Johft viii. 39. w^here * he told the Jews who* sought to kill him, that not- « withstanding they were the natural bfTspring of Abra- * ham, they were not his chlldfCTif lijiless they did the * w,orks of Abraham. The same distinction is tat^ght ' atill m.ove -olainW h-- t^r spc-rtle Fs'ii, wha catls A.brn- INTRODUCTION, ^^^ * ham's natiiral progeny, his seed by the law^ the law of < marriage ; but his seed by the appointment of God, « who gave believers of all nations to him for seed, that * which is bij tJi^ faith of Abraham^ Boiti. iv. 16. thai < the promise might be sure to all the seedy not to that only « ivhich is by the law, but to tJiat also 'which is by the faith * of Abraham, who is the father of us all. In like manner, * the same apostle, by telling us, Rom. ix. 8. the children * of the fleshy these are not the children of God, but the chil- < dren of the promise %re counted for tlte seed, hath insmvi- < ated that Abraham had two kinds of children or seed, t and that the seed by the promise, a father of mfiny na- < tions IJtave constituted thee, are the children of God to < whom alone the promises in the covenant in their se- * cond and highest meanings belong,' ' Often before, had I read these passages as they oc- cur in the Scriptures, without their producing any re- markable effect. On this occasion, however, it was otherwise, for occurring as they did, in a professed treatise on the covenant with Abraham, the grand source Avhence Pedo-baptists draw all their authority for tlie baptizing of their infants, I could not but apply them to that subject.. ' If there be two distinct seeds, thought * I, a natural and a spiritual, to which of them do we '• Gentiles belong ? Not to the natural, but to the * spiritual, provided we be possessed of the faith of ' Abraham. But then again, I thought, if we ourselves < be connected with Abraham only by fafch, a id if this * connection be only spirituals, and not carnal, how ^ comes it to pass, that our children, who are connected * with us "oiily by carnal descent, can be included in a ' covenant v/hich we ourselves had no right to till v.e * believed ? Would not this be cohtiecting carnal tiling i ' with spiritual, and, to the spiritual part of Abraham's ■' ^-^ed joining: a carnal part, ifi'hich seeras incon VUl INTRODUCTIOK. * not to say witii these passages merely, but with the * very nature of the thing?' Though I considered this as a k^^. , \\./,diaid, *•■ ye shall remain, for ye shall die in your sins, and whither I go, thither ye cannot come." And vs^ho does not recollect the awful denunciation against the in- corrigible adjberents of falsehood, mentioned in the se- cond chapter of the second epistle to the Thessalonians ? .cr. 1 1. For this cause God shall send them strong delusion, INTRODUCTION* XV that they should believe a lie^ that they all might he damned nvho believed not the truth^ hut had pleasure in utirighteciis- ness. Upon the whole then, there is, truly, something so foolish, §o grieving, so awfullj absnrd and dangerous in this sentiment, that it is our earnest prayer that vye may never hear it again maintained. As to the third class of whom we were to take notice, we cannot, properly speaking, call them opposers to investigation, though they virtually oppose it in the most dangerous form, by not thinking it worth their while to investigate at all ; but, in a mechanical sort of manner they get into the vortex of novelty, because they will it ; and mistaking bold and confident.assertions for positive proofs, it is not a little to their astonishment that all their brethren do not follow them. Hence to be virulent and acrimonious, ill-natured, and never dis- posed to allow another to think for himself, if in any thing he difi'er from them, are tempers almost insepa- rable from the precipitate and obsequious proselyte. And,' alas ! for them, unhappy and inconsistent mortals, have we not seen them manifesting the same turn of mind against that principle to-day, which, by th^r me- chanical sort of circuit they embraced to-morrow ; and to-morrow, strange to tell, directing all their hostilities against what they held to-day ? And withal, they con- tend, that it is for the sake of truth they thus act. But little do they know that truth is more deeply wouuded, and more instTperable barriers put in the way of its pro- gress, by this very behaviour of theirs, than by all the scoffin^s of the infidel. Do they really imagine, that men, even of -common sagacity, have not penetration enough to see through their vain pretexts ? To credit the;>-», indeed, it is always truth that they are holding j but >vill they ever make us believe that truth veers kbout like the air in the atriiosphere, to every point to 3c\1 INTRODUCTION. which they may turn their face ; or in otlier words, that it is one thing to-day, and another to-morrow ? N04 they never shall. Truth is one universal and eternal principle. It doth not draw in contrary directions. It doth not require more than oae discovery. And when once learned, it cannot be again unlearned, merely as caprice or fashion may dictate. When we behold our brethren therefore, running seemingly without thought or reflection into every new started theory, and perpetual- ly changing as often as their leaders may choose to bid them ; when they appear to " count it their very right- eousness," as one expresseth it^ *' to be given to change ;'* and when they hold all their successive schemes, how opposed soever they may be the one to the other, with the same degree of certainty, even absolute certainty — we cannot help connecting their state with that of the man, out of whom the unclean spirit had departed, who ivalked through dry places seeking rest^ but finding none. Such people's religion seems to consist more in some- thing yet to be discovered, than in any thing already known. All their old theories they discard as errone- ous ; that only is true which they at present hold ; and if it should so happen, as it very likelj^ will, that they shall discover something new in future, then their pre- sent truths, how tenaciously soever they now maintain them, will, like the former, be abandoned as errors. Thus, in the most inconsistent and irrational manner, do they allow themselves to go on, under pretext that they are the almost sole abettors of the truth, constantly op- posing, not only themselves, but their brethren who wish to live at peace with them, and exhibiting to the world at the same time, though it may escape their own observation, the most false representation of that very truth about which they so vehemently contend. Upon Ure whole then, I shall just add, that if the INTRODUCTION. KV'ii following treatise can be only proved, either in whole or in part, to the conviction of the author, to be found- ed on error, that he shall not consider his honour, false- ly so called, bound to maintain it, but shall rather thank, the person, whoever he may be, who shall have the kindness to point out his foibles ; and, abandoning what he ought to abandon, he shall rejoice in having it in his power to embrace the opposite truth. But while he is thus free in avowing his readiness to be convinced of his error, he must be thus honest in boldly declaring, that it is only what he /lim self conceives to be error, after it has been pointed out, and not what every cap- tious and fretful mind would be eager in wishing us to reckon so. Nay, we forewarn such plainly, that they may look long before they see us approximating one step nearer them, on account of any such dastardly means. And to others we would say, that if they really wish to do us good, by convincing us of our er- ror, if so be that we are in one, they must do it upon entirely other grounds than those of carrying us back to the old beaten paths, every corner of which we have explored a thousand times. Not that we have an itch for novelty, but for reason ; and it is because we have found reason to have deserted, or more strictly speak- ing, never to have existed in those paths, that we are compelled to relinquish them. I have just a debt to acknowledge before I enter upon my plan, and though it be a near relation, even a bro- ther according to the flesh, to whom I owe it, yet it is so justly due, that if I never shall have it in my power to repay him in kind for the assistance he has given iu" this inquiry, I must at least publicly acknowledge it, an(S tell the world freely, that if it possesses any merit, it isi not wholly mine, but that he also is entitled to a share. XVIU INTRODUCTIOK. But, alas I merit I why should we speak a word re- specting this ? If wc could, indeed, perforin works of buperorogation, it might then come with some pro- priety ; but in our condition as creatures, and sinful creatures too, we are convinced that we never can serve our Maker as we ought, far less to merit any thing good at his hand. Discarding all such claims, there- fore, that he may be graciously pleased to accept of this feeble attempt to serve him with his own, is the prayer of our inmost soul. A Compendious Vieiv of the Plan of the following Work, Having been led, as has been stated, by a casual, or perhaps more properly speaking, by a providential circumstance, to investigate the subject of baptism^ according to the key already laid down, of the distinc- tion between the two seeds of Abrahani, it appeared necessary, before any decision could be warrantably passed, to obtain as distinctly as possible a knowledge of the following things. 1. The nature of the covenant which God madcvvith Abraham, in which it is expressly said, that he was to be a God to him^ and to his seed after him. iJ. Of the persons included in the covenant, called his s£ca, which, according to the words of our blessed Lord, are distinguished into carniil and spiritual. S. "^£11^ privileges to which they had a right by their iuteiest in the covenant. rNTRODUGTION, xix 4. The jjermanetui/ of the covenant in all its parts, or in other words, whether the same state of things is to remain under the Christian, as under the legal dis- pensation, or if they be altered, in what does the altera- tion consist ? what things are abrogated, and what re- main ? 5. The distinguishing or characteristic marks of the two dispensations, and whether the latter, in any respect, resembles the former, in what may be denominated its carnal parts, whether it respects ordinances or subjects. 6. Were these important articles but fairly and im- partially examined, might they not lead to conclusions, which, by the blessing of God, might be the happy means of putting an end to that dreadful controversy, which has for so many ages so agitated and convulsed the whole of the religious world ? 7. It m.ust always be a source of grief to any person who loves truth, and who wishes truth alone to prevail, to see even good people, supporting what they imagine to be truth by improper means. As on no subjrtt has this method been more abundantly adopted than on the one now before us, it is our design to bestow a little attention upon it, and to assign a particular chapter for- the consideration of the various false glosses, unwarrant- able conclusions, and very improper treatment whicli the abettors of both sidea of the question have recipro- cally given each other. 8. And finally, as we may perhaps diiFer j^pm many, if not from most of our baptized brethren, respecting various points connected with the ordinance itself, and as we see no inconsistency in Christians who are united in other respects, though they do not see eye to eye in this, still to walk, together in love and unity, we shall, therefore, for the consideration of various topics of thi« nature, assign also a place. XX IKTRODUCTION. These various particulars, it is conceived, comprise the substance of all that we mean to advance ; but that the design may be more fully manifest, we shall here again briefly enumerate the several heads, giving an analysis, in a general way, of the several topics to be discussed under each. And, 1. As to the nature of the covenant God made with Abraham, from the sublime views which are given of it in the New Testament, we hav^e no doubt that it in- cluded spiritual as well as temporal blessings, and that they are to be taken in a higher sense than many have assigned to them, that is to say, only temporal posses- sions in the land of Canaan. This .will, of course, lead us back, to the original promise, to the primary forma- tion of the covenant with Abraham; and a commentary on what is recorded in the book of Genesis in relation to these transactions, will be necessary to complete our purpose in this place. 2. As to the jjersons included in the covenant, a seed spiritual and carnal, not merely answerable to the same respective natures of the covenant, but, in the nature of the thing, excluding none, even the most distant regions of the earth from the church of the living God, and calculated to give a hope not only to thosff descended from the loins of faithful Abraham, but to the most guilty and forlorn amongst the nations, nfid to all that are afar offy even to as mairj as the Lord our God shall call. This chapter will consist of several different parts. We &\\z\\Jirst investigate the grounds we have for asserting that there are two kinds of seed included in the Abra- hamic covenant, then treat of these separately, and after that, make a few general remarks upon the whole. 3. Under our third head, the privileges of the cove- nant will be considered. And these being likewise twofold in their nature, namely, spiritual and temporal^ INTRODUCTION. XII it will hence follow, that thej would be actually en- joyed by all within its bonds in exact correspondence to the particular situation they held therein. If spiritual, they would no doubt enjoy spiritual blessings in addi- tion to the good things of this life ; but if only carnal, higher enjoyments than such as are of a carnal or tem- poral nature, they could not possess. Our order, in the consideration of this topic, will be much the same as in our last. 4. That the same state of things as was established by the legal dispensation, or even by the covenant with Abraham, was not to continue, is manifest by the apostles decree in the assembly at Jerusalem ; and that it was not to be wholly overturned, is equally obvious from Christ's declaration, tliai he came not to destroy the laiu and the prophets. Was there, therefore, any alteration in the covenant ? or if there was, in what did that al- teration consist ? Why was it continued the same till Christ came ? and why was there an alteration at that period rather than at any other ? and what was the state of tilings after the alteration took jjlace ? Answers to these questions, and to all that they necessarily involve, will form the basis of our fourth principle. 5. Under our next head, however, this last idea will more naturally find a place, as it will evidently appear, fi'om the whole genius of the gospel, and particularly from the epistle to the Hebrews, that the two dispensa- tions are most strikingly different, and that our blessed Lord, when speaking of the kingdoms of this world, said with peculiar emphasis, now is my kingdom not from hence. As if he had said. Formerly, indeed, it resem- bled them, but now it is different — a new order and constitution of things has taken place. Hence it cometh not with observation, but, like the wind, it Is known pniy^ by its effects. It is now purely spiritual, and in ^Xll IVTRODUCTrON. tbe hearts of men ; even the people he makes willuigin the day of his power. In such a strain will om Jift/i article run. \6. These points being established, will the conclusion be| rash, to say, that, in confornuty to this new and spiritual order of things, we are henceforth to know no main after the ilesh ; that though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth are we to know hitn no more ; and that, as that which is born after the flesh is flesh, and that which is born after the Spirit is spirit, so, to be heirs of the covenant in the spiritual sense, we must be born again ? , Here then, we must enter into particular reasoning with our brethren, concerning the subject of Pedo-baptism . We must endeavour to draw their various arguments into a focus, in order to ascer- tain whether or not they will tally with this*undeniable principle. And if wc shall find them to agree, then we must maintain that they are right ; but if it shall hap- pen to be otherwise, right they cannot be, whether they may think so or not. We shall, therefore, in this case, candidly speak our sentiments, calmly endeavouring to correct error, not by angry expressions or high sound- ing words, but simply by the exhibition of the truth. j 7. Our seventh chapter will be occupied in correct- inor various abuses which have been run into on this subject, viz. the false glosses, the unwarrantable conclu- sions, and the very unchristian-like treatment which jjnany abettors of both sides of the question have reci- procally bestowed on each other. For this purpose, we shall first take a brief review of the various passa- ges of holy writ, which are generally brought forward in support of Pedo-baptism. We shall then consider the charges of error and heresy which have been reci- procally employed in regard to this subject, in order t© §h^w how falsely they are founded. INTRODUCTION. 2UiU 8. As for our eighth and last particular, under it we propose to consider several points respecting the ordi- nance itself, as, first, the mode ; secondly, the proprilety df persons who have been known to have had a Ibng standing in the profession of the Christian faith, and who were baptized in infancy, being re-baptized after' •wards when they came to have their minds better Un- formed respecting this ordinance. ' Considerations relative to the impropriety of Chris- tians separating from one another on account of matters of this nature, will come next in course. These we shall include in an appendix. And here, without suf- fering ourselves to be influenced by human opinior| either on the one side or on the other, we shall hav^ immediate recourse to the Scriptures, from which we hope to demonstrate that it is no light matter for Chris- tians thus to act in regard to one another ; and that the very essence of such conduct, must, in fact, consist in the grossest mistake of this grand first principle, name- ly, the stepping out of our own particular sphere^ and as- sinning the prerogatives of the Judge of all the earthy seem- ing to forget that the rights of conscience are not in- trusted into the hand of any man or set of men ; but that as every man has ah unquestionable right in all matters of conscience to judge for himself, so the pre- cept runs, every man to his own master^ he standeth or falleth. As upon these principles, therefore, we could not justify ourselves in separating from our brethren^ merely on account of our difference of sentiment res^ pecting baptism, so we would be equally far from jus[ tifying them, should a separation be insisted for on theij part. That matters may be rightly understood betwee us, however, and that none mny have any secret grudt because we do not act like others who have espousel^ Baptist sentiments, in going away of their own accorc^ XXIV INTRODUCTION. we shall candidly assign our reasons for our so doing, leaving it with themselves to decide whether we be right or wrong. Thes6 are the leading topics we intend to consider in the following pages. And it is our earnest desire, that a double portion of the spirit of all grace may be pour- ed out upon us, to enable us to illustrate a subject of so vast importance, both for the advancement of the glory of God, and for the comfort and edification of his dear people. And if these objects be only in any tolerable measure obtained, richer will be the reward, than if kingdoms and empires had been placed within our reach ! CONTENTS. CHAPTER I. OF THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. Pag'^ Sect. I. General Observations, - - 1 II. Commentary on Gen. xii. 1, 2, 3. S III. Do. on Gen. xii. 7. xiii. 14-,— 17. 16 IV. Do. on Gen. xv. - - 24 V. Do. on Gen. xvii. _ - 28 VI. General remarks upon the foregoing Sections, - - . 46 CHAPTER II. OF THE PERSONS INCLUDED IN THE COVENANT, CALLED THE SEED OF ABRAHAM. Sect. I. Sfeewlngthattheseedof Abrahamlsof two kinds, namely, carnal and spiritual, 7i II. Of the LITERAL seed of Abraham, - 92 III. Of the SPIRITUAL seed of Abraham, 109 IV. General remarks upon the foregoing Sections, - _ . 122 CHAPTER III. OF THE PRIVILEGES OF THE COVENANT. Sect. I. Of theprlvilegesenjoyedby the carnal seed, . / _ 13S II. Of the privileges enjoyed by the SPIRITUAL seed, - - - 142 CHAPTER IV. OF THE PERMANENCY OF THE COVENANT IN ALL ITS PARTS. 150 CHAPTER V. ©F THE DISTINGUISHING AND CHARACTERISTIC MARKS OF THl FORMER AND LATTER DISPENSATIONS, 15S XXYl CONTENTS. CHAPTER VI. Page CONTAINING PARTICULAR REASONINGS WITH FE- DO-BAPTISTS, AND UNDENIABLE CONCLUSIONS FROM THE FOREGOING ILLUSTRATIONS. S^ECT. I. Of the argument for Pedo-baptism, drawn from the circumstance that we convey to our children a depraved and polluted nature, - - 18S. II. Of the argument for Pedo-baptism, drawn from the Abrahamic covenant, 193 III. Of the argument for Pedo-baptism, * ' drawn from the baptizing of households, 2 IS CHAPTER VII. AN EXAMINATION OF SEVERAL DETACHeS PASSA- GES COMMONLy ADDUCED IN SUPPORT OF PE- DO-BAPTISM, See. Sect. I. - - - - 22f II. Of the reciprocal charges which have been brought by the abettors of both sides of the question, with a view to discard their respective systems, - 201 CHAPTER VIII. «F THE MODE OF THE ORDINANCE, AND OF THE • SUBJECT OF RE-BAPTIZING. Sect. I. Of the mode of the ordinance, - SOS II. Of the subject of re-baptizing, - Sll APPENDIX. OF CHRISTIAN UNITY AND FORBEARANCE. Part I. Of general principles, - - S21 11. Of particular principles, - - 38S ■ ^j^ tr t' ERRATA. p. I. 1. 13. before premises, read tie II. 2 from the bo'tim, /or magnificence, r^a no tratural 'ight, &cc. I do i;ut mean, by tljo particle noiv in this connection, to say, that the Jews ever had such a right as we are here speaking of, to the covmtries through which they are dispersed, but only tliat they once bad such a right to Canaan, and which no others could have either to that or any other land, unless they obtained it in the same way. I mean, moreover, to say, that though the Jews cnce bad such a right, they seem to have it no longer ; but are now in this respect en- tirely on a i/ar with the other nation? among whom they sojourn. mk THE ABRAHAMIC COVENA.NT. 2i accomplished, and be intended to remove them from it, it so happened that in the ordinary course of his provi- dence, he needed only signally to punish them for the crimes of which they had been guilty, and his purpose was completely effected. Nor would it be any argument to the contrary to say, as indeed many have done, that, as it was on ac- count of their wickedness and unbelief that the Jews were cast out, so whenever they shall come to see their sins, so as to be humbled for them, and shall turn unto the ' Lord, they shall be again restored to their own land. Were the persons who espouse such sentiments but duly to consider the matter, they would soon per- ceive many and insuperable difficulties attending the idea of a literal restoration, which are all happily re- moved by taking the fact simply as it stands. There would not only be a litervil restoratioa of the land, and that without any apparently specific end now to be ob- tained by it, but there would be also a restoration of the Mosaic worship and ritual, the royalty of David, and, in one word, all the peculiarities and appendages which pertained to the former dispensation *. It would imply too, that the believing Gentiles would have also a right to it as well as the Jews ; for if the Jews, the natural branches, were broken off because of unbelief, and the Gentiles graffed in by faith ; and if, when the foi-mer shall, through faith likewise, be made parta- kers of the sap and fatness of their own olive, shall be restored to the land of Canaan ; it would imply, I say, that the believing Gentiles too, who are now made all one in Christ Jesus, had also a right to the same in- heritance. Yea, it would imply that God was really unfaithful to his promise, and that he had actually suf- fered :■ to fail in*the case of the many thousand Jews, ■'^ Tsa. l"v. 20. 21. Uo--. ill. 5. 22 TH£ ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. v.'ho believed in the first preaching of the gospel, who| instead of being thus distinguished on account of their faith, were involved in all the calamities common to their unbelie\'ing countrymen ; the previous, faithful, and friendly warning of their blessed Master, an atten- tion to which would no doubt, in some measure, melio- rate their sufferings, alone excepted. In short, it would imply that there is always to subsist in the church of Christ, a distinction between Jews and Gentiles ; that the middle wall of partition has never yet, nor ever will be broken down ; or else if it be, and that both are on a level, and made one in Christ Jesus, as the Scriptures assert, that all who are thus distinguislied as the true Israel of God, to whatever nation they niay have formerly belonged, shall be joint partakers of this blessing as a common interest. And hence it will come to pass, that tht ' ihall be gathered from the east and from the west, from the north and from the south, to sit down with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, not in the kingdom of heaven and of glory, the blessed antitype of Canaan, but in the literal Canaan, and that for the purpose of returning to what the apostle styles, iJtf ivcak afid beggarly elements of this nvorld *, Gal. iv. 9. All this, we say, would be manifestly implied in taking the restoration of the Jews to their own land, after they are made one with the Gentiles by faith in Christ Je- sus, in a literal sense. But is it possible that any can thus understand it? Would it not bo better then to consider the restoration of Canaan entirely in a spiri- taal sense, as a prophetic repi^escntatlon of the conver- sion of God's ancient people to the Christian faith ? and, extending our ideas beyond the narrow limits of the land of Palestine, consider Canaan in this sense, as comprehending the heathen nations also, which art TflE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 2S saven to Christ " for an inheritance, and the uttermost ends of the earth for a possession * ?" And thus, do we not perceive, by the admirable providence of God, one most beautiful design in all his plans, from the begin- ning to the end ? — First, in calling Abraham, in select- ing his descendents, and in giving them his statutes, or- dinances, and certain worldlj possessions, \Thich might keep them together in one place, till a certain end he had in view in all this was obtained ; and thro, when his purposes were answered, suffering them, in the samfe admirable manner, to be scattered throughout all the regions of the earth, and there to remain in their dispersed, cast-oiF, and forlorn condition, " without a kin^, and without a prince, and without sacrifice f," &:c. till the fulness of the Gentiles should come in. — AndtheiJ^ Vv'hen the gospel had penetrated into those dark and drearj regions into which tlie Jews had stray- ed, like prodigals from their father's house, and by its blessed influences, changed the whole face of nature, so to speak, from a waste howling wilderness, into the garden of Eden, the Jews, struck with this miracle, be- gin to recollect themselves. In it they see their sin, which was the cause of their dispersion ; and along with it, the mercy of their ancient God, unmerited and unsolicited, extending to others no less criminal and wicked than themselves. With them therefore they cast in their lot, sayings " whither thou goest we will go, and where thou lodgest we will lodge | ;" for we perceive " that God is in you of a truth ^." And hence, instead of needing to engage in long and weari- some jouniies, ere they could worship in an acceptable manner the God of their fathers, they find that the Sa- viour himself had long ago freed them from that obli- * Psal. ii.8. t Hos.iii.4.. $ Ruthi. IG. § 1 Cor. xiv.25. 24 THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. gation, by declaring " that the hour cometh, and now is, when men shall neither in this mountain," (mount Gerizim, to-wit) *' nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father ; but that the true worshippers should in every place, without distinction, worship the Father in spirit and in truth ; for the Father seeketli su,ch to worship him *." The fulness of the Gentiles being thus come in, and every one calling himself by the name of the God oiJacob, the Jews, now converted by the same truth, retain no longer their ancient enmity at the Gen- tiles, but seek a place in their communion, and count it cin honour as well as a privilege to be incorporated into 'he same body. And thus whenever the happy change may happen to take place, they will count themselves at home ; and instead of looking and longing for a restoration to the earthly Canaan, they will have their eyes directed to that better and heavenly country, of which Canaan was the type ; and with patience wait the Lord's time to be transported tbither. — Such are our views of this important subject. We now cc-.ne to a third transaction of God with Abraham, which occupies the whole of the xvth chap- ter : but this we shall consider in our next section. SECTION IV. The Subject contimieJ. JL HE subject of the ensuing section is contained in the xvth chapter ;of Genesis. Because Abraham had been called, both In a temporal and spiritual point of view, * JoV.n iv. 21,-23. THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 25 to lead a life of peculiar difficulties and dangers ; io strengthen and encourage him therefore, tfie word of the Lord came to himy ver. 1 . Sat/ing^ Fear not Abram^ I am thy shield, and thy exceeding great reward. Fear noty Abram^ I am thy shield. To see hov/ re- markably this promise was fulfilled in its literal mean- ing, we need only to recollect the various dangers to which Abraham himself was exposed, and the much more' numerous and complicated train of sufferings •with which his descendents were visited, first by their Egyptian oppressors, then by their wars with the sur- rounding nations j by their various captivities ; by their internal commotions amongst themselves $ and, lastly, by their final dispersion. But these things considered, is not their very existence in the present day, the most demonstrative proof that God has, for nearly these four thousand years, shielded not only the parent, but the children * ? And, as to its spiritual sense, the fact that God has always had a seed to serve him in every generation ; a few, who reflected a divine light even in the darkest times, who even in the hottest persecutions were' not afraid to confess his name ; and as in all times past, so * See this most beautifully illustrated in the case of the pa triarchs, in the cvth Psalm. " He hath remembered his co'-Jenant for ever, the word which he commanded to a thousand generations ; which covenant he made with Abraham, and his oath unto Isaac ; and confirmed the same unto Jacob for a law, and to Israel for an everlasting covenant ; saying, 'Unto thee will I give the land of Canaan, the lot of your inheritance : when they were but a few men m number ; yea, very few, and strangers in it. When they went from one nation to another, from one kingdom to another people, he suffered no man to do them wrong ; yea, he reproved kings for their sakes ; saying, Touch not mine anointed, and do tny prophets no harm,'' D 26 THE ABKAHAMIC COVENANT. ti^e many who are now living witnesses for him, not only simply declare that God has been^ and still is, their shield, but that, in defiance of eartli and hell, it shews that he can work, and that notie can hinder him. God promises farther to be an exceeding great reward io Abraham. A person may be defended or shielded from danger ; but he may escape, as Job says, " only with the skin of his teeth *." In addition therefore to mere preservation, God promises here to reward his people ; and Oh I how munificent is the reward he pur- poses to bestow ! As if the whole universe were too small, and too insignificant for the capacious soul of man, the infinite Creator of the universe proposes to re» ward it with nothing less tha.n Himself I As all the unregenerate seed of Abraham^ as well as the sinners of the Gentiles, cry with the many^ « Who will shew us any good ? what shall we eat, and what shall we drink, and wherewithal shall we be clothed ? "-^as they seek their portion in the creature, and not in the Crea- tor ; and as it is only the spiritually-minded who say, ** Lord, lift thou up upon us the light of thy counte- nance -y for whom have we in heaven but thee, and there is none upon earth that our souls desire besides thee ;" so this part of the promise, cannot be taken otherwise than in a strictly spiritual sense. But how strange and Unaccountable are the opera- tions of the human iflind, that notwithstanding such en- couragements, it should at times, even in good people, seem to overlook all the goodness and loving-kindness of the Lord, and brood only on its own distresses, per- haps too as often imaginary as real, which, by the way, it aggravates a thousand fold. One should have ex- pected that Abraham, in the answer he returned for this goodness and munificence of the Lord, would have * Job xix. 20. THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 27 Rt least said something in connexion with the subject. But, no : Abraham was as yet going childless, and his chief solicitude was about the obtaining of an heir, ver. 2,3. Happy is it for us, however, that the Lord does not copy after our example. He did not, like Abraham, deviate from the subject he proposed, but removed all his fears respecting a stranger heiring his possessions, by the comfortable assurance, that one who should come forth of his own bowels should be his heir ; and that he should have even a progeny countless as the stars for multitude, ver. 4-, 5. It is said, ver. 6. that Abraham believed the Lord^ and that he cotmted it to him for righteousness. But to this we shall not at present attend, as it will more naturally come under consideration afterwards. The promise of the land of Canaan is again repeat- ed, ver. 7. 16. 18. And because Abraham, ver. 8. de- sired to knoWy (surely by some sensible representation), nuhereby he should inherit that blessings the Lord gave him the solemn tokens of his covenant, and cpnfirmed it to him with an oath, ver. 9, — 18. It would be deviating top much from the subject we have in view, to attempt a full investigation of all the matters contained in this chapter ; neither is it necessa- ry, as they have been again and again very successfully done by others. But we would remark, from what oc- curs in the 13th and 15th verses, that, under the em- blem of possessions in the land of Canaan, Abraham must have understood a better, even an heavenly coun- try ; otherwise the land, from what is there said, though it had been even the primeval paradise itself, could have been no flattering prospect to him, nor yet J^o his descendents, till the fourth generation. \iphe next transaction i? contain^^d in the ?;viith chap-. 28 THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. ter, where the covenant is renewed, Abraham's name changed, circumcision instituted, and Isaac promised. As this would however lead us into particulars of too important and complicated a nature to be huddled up in the end of the present, we shall rather make them the subject of another section. SECTION V. The Subject continued. X H E subject of this section is continued in the xviith chapter of Genesis — Ver. 1. Abraham's age is stated to be at this ]-)eriod, nineiy-mne years ; and the Lord is said to have appeared to him, calling himself the Al- mighty God, and giving him this injunction, Walk before me, and be thou perfect. As every one conversant with Christian duty, and the principles whence that duty must flow, well understands the import of this injunction, it is not our intention to enter upon it here. " The covenant which God gave to be between him- self and Abraham, is therefore the next thing of course^ ver. 2. 4'. 7. And it may be remarked, that both the covenant itself, and the blessings contained in it, are precisely the same as those of which w? have been speaking. If indeed there be any difference, it consists in minuteness of detail. Abraham is styled, the father of manyiiationsj ver. 4. And again, ver. 5. his name was no more to be called Abram, but Abraham ; for a father of many nations^ saith God, have I made, or consti- tuted thee. And this agrees with what has been already THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT, "29 observed, chap. xii. 3. that in him should all the fami- lies of the earth be blessed- To the same purpose he says, ver. 6. j^nd I ivill make thee exceedwg fruitful^ and I will make Rations of theey and hhigs shu/l come out oj thee. With regard to the literal meaning, it does not appear Yery applicable to this passage ; not as it respects na- tions here mentioned as descending from him, for in this sense he was the founder of but one nation ; to-wit, the nation of the Jews : nor yet as a constituted head or father ; for Abraham, in this sense, like every persoi^^^ else, was naturally the father of his descendents, with- out being made or constituted so. Taking then the passage in its spiritual signification, what a grand view does it present us with of the cove- nant of grace ; that, whereas the dark places of the earth have long hten. full of the habitations of cruelty, they shall all shortly be covered with the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the channel of the deep. The gospel is just to the nations what it is to indivi- duals^ a system of general universal utility, calculated and designed for every individual of the human race, and addressed to every one without a single exception. It is to the nations y to all the families of the earth., to the human kind^ wherever their lot may happen to be cast, that the blessed promise here extends. And what a beautiful conVjboration have we of it, not only in the passages quoted below *, but, when the steps came to be laid for its actual accomplishment, in Christ's com- missioning his apostles to go into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. By this promise therefore are our souls animated, and our expectations enlarged. We rejoice to think, that though Jesus, " the desire of all nations," was rejected * Psal. ii. Ixxii. Isa- xlix. 18,-26. &- al. freq. 20 THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. and despised by one of them when he came in the flesh, that yet every nation under heaven shall bow to his sceptre. The kingdoms are his. They pertain to him as a matter of right ; not only as an inheritance given by promise, but as a possession legally purchased by his sufferings and death. His gospel shall therefore spread abroad, and by means thereof shall the nations be brought under him. They shall not be merely converted to him by bearing his name, but they shall be made a willing people in the day of his power. Sa- Jiin, the god of this world, shall be cast out, shall fall as lightning from heaven, never more to arise, and the glorious kingdom of our blessed God erected in every country where he had his seat. And as this shall be only brought about by the publication of the truth, it is hence the duty of Christians to do all that in then^ lies to hasten it forward. Again, not only nations, but kings were to come out of the loins of Abraham. May not this, in the spiri- tual sense, to say nothing of the literal, be aptly appli- ed to the Lord Jesus Christ, who is the King of kings, ?.nd Lord of lords, and to all the spiritual subjects of his kingdom, who indeed are not treated like servants or subjects, but arc heirs, and of royal dignity, being heirs of God, and joint heirs with Christ, arid made lings and priests unto the Father ? We next notice certain properties here ascribed to the , covenant. It is styled an everlasting coYen^Lni, v^r . 1 . and the land of Canaan said to be given for an ever- lasting possession to Abraham and to his seed. For the meaning of the word Csbir, here so rendered, we refet to what we have already said in a preceding section. We there remarked that this word, though the only one in the Hebrew language which signifies eternity in the proper sense, yet being frequently employed to sig- THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 31 Tixiy time indefinitely, its true meaning can only be ascertained by a due attention to the subject to which it is applied. Taking the covenant, therefore, which God is here said to establish between himself and Abraham, and Abraham's seed in their generations, in the strictly spiritual sense, as signifying the covenant of grace, then the word Cabiy will be applicable, in it3 most unlimited sense, as expressive of eternal duration. And truly the covenant in this view we would extol in the highest strains, and say with David, that it is not only " an everlasting covenant, ordered in all things and sure," but that it " is, all our salvation, and all our desire *." In this view likewise would we understand the apostle's assertion, Rom. iv. 15. *-' that it" (justifi- cation, to- wit) " is of faith, that it" (the inheritanca, namely) *' might be by grace ; to the end that the pro- mise might be sure to all the seed." In this view, in short, do we recognize all the doctrines of the gospel, as being eternal in their nature, and including the gifts and callings of God, which are without repentance. The recovery of fallen mian by a Redeemer, regene- ration or the new birth, faith in God's promises, justifi- cation in his sight, sanctification, perseverance in holi- ness, and final glorification in the eternal world, are doctrines of the gospel which stand or fall together, and which render all who embrace them the true seed of Abraham, in the sense of which we are speaking, and to whom the promise cannot be but sure : *' for all that the Father hath given to Christ shall come unto him, and of all that he hath given him he shall lose nothing, but shall jjrcserve 3.nd raise it up at the last day f." And we may just add on this part of the subject, that God gave not only a simple promise to Abraham and his seed,' in the sense we have specified, but '< willing « 2 Sam. xxiii. 5. t John vi.37. 39. 32 THE AURAHAMIC COVENANT. more abundantly to manifest unto these heirs of the promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath, 4hat by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have strong consolation^ who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us." But though this be evidently the true meaning of th^' original word here rendered everlastings when applied to the covenant in its most extended and spiritual sense, yet it cannot be disputed that it has a more limited sig- nification in several other passages in this very chap- ter. For the sense in which we understand it, when ap- plied to the possession of the land of Canaan, see what v/e have said on this subject in our third section. And for the same reasons, we would understand it with the same limitations, when applied to the covenant of cir- cumcision, ver. 13. But of this we shall speak more particularly, when we come to that part of our subject which treats of the changes which took place at the in- troduction of the new dispensation. The next thing claiming our attention is, that the co- venant was not only established with Abraham him- self, but also with his seed. And I iv'ill establish my co^ venant hetnveen me and thee^ and thy seed after thee^ in their generations i and so on. But as this will be also the sub- ject of a subsequent part of our work, we shall say no- thing on it here, but reserve the full discussion of it for its proper place. We come therefore to the institution of the rite of circumcision^ ver. 9, — 14. And God said unto Abraham, Thou shah keep my covenant therefore^ thou, and thy seed af- ter thee, in their generations. This is my covenant ivhich ye shall'iecp hetiveen me and you, and thy seed after thee ; every man child among you shall be circumcised. And ye * Heb.vi.lT.lS. THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. "sz shall circumcise the Jlesh of your foreskin ; and it shall be a token of the covenant betiuixt me and you. And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised atnong you, every man child in your generations ; he that is born in the housey or bought with money of any stranger which is not of thy seed^ He that Is born In thy houscy and he that Is bought with thy inoney^ must needs be circumcised ; and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant. And the un- circumcised man child, whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from hii people : he hath broken my covenant. What was thus required was Immediately complied with, as we learn from the conclusion of the chapter. Ver. 23. And Abraham took Ishmael his son, and all that were born in his house., and all that were bought with his money, every male among the men of Abraham^s house, and circumcised the flesh of their foreskin In the self-same day, as God had said unto him. And Abraham was ninety years old and nine, when hi* was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin. And Ishmael his son was thirteen years old when he was circumcised in the Jlesh of his foreskin. In the self- same day was Abraham circumcised, and Ishmael his son ,- and all the men of his house, born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, were circumcised with him. Without entering into tlie controversy which has been agitated amongst the learned, respecting the orlgl' nal Institution of this rite, what especially demands our attention, and will also be of more use than any deci- sions of this nature, is, to try to ascertain the grand de- itgfi of its institution. Indeed, with regard to the time of its institution, we must plainly say, and that, though in opposition to so great authority as that of the late Lord President Forbes *, that it does not appear to us * See his Works, vol. i. p. 151. &c. Edinburgh edit. ; also Jo- seph, contra Ap. B. i. 5 22. &. Antiq. B. viii. c. x. \ 3. E St TifE ABRAHABIIC Cd*"^ENANT. to have been one of the original institutions enjoined or? Adam after the fall, and which mnst therefore have been practised by his descendents ; for this good reason, that if this had been the case, Abraham and his family must have known and attended to it long before the period mentioned in this chapter. It is from this time henceforward, and never before, that the Scriptures speak of it as an institution of divine appointment, or indeed so much as mention it at all ; and theref)5 being the genitive, we are not at liberty to adopt the former rendering, nor to retain the word sigri, as in the common transls'ion, without invol- ving ourselves in a kind of absurdity. Wiicn we speak of the tign of any thing, we are surely not to be blamed for inquiring what this sign is. Now, by this rule, if circumcision had a sign, what was that sign ? The knife, I should suppose ; the same as chirurgical instruments are the sign of chirurgical operations, wa- ter the sign of drowning, and a gibbet the sign of hanging. Mr Wardlaw, evidently from not adverting to these circumstances, has, in my opinion, gone into a very unwarrantable interpretation of this passage. He considers circumcision here as both a sign and a seal; and occupies several pages of his Lectures (which see) in order to shew the various respects in which the blessings of the covenant of grace, were signified and sealed by it. But it does not appear that the apostle represents it in this light at all. His sense seems evidently to be, that, by what is here denominated the mark of circumcision, is simply circumcision itself ; and it is this, and nothing else, which is the seal in the apostle's account of t-i'. matter. THE ABRAPAMIC COVENANT. 37 thing of a carnal nature is to be admitted, is not so very clear. Nor have I any idea that we need to inquire Tvhat conceptions an ignorant or unthinking multitude might form of it ; for if we could only ascertain dis- tinctly the design of God in its institution^ this would be quite sufficient. It appears to me, I must own, that, as the covenant of which tircumcision was a token, con- sisted of various parts, and evidently included temporal as well as spiritual blessings ; so it would not only be viewed in reference either to the one or the other, ac- cording as the persons themselves happened to be car- nal or spiritual, but that it was designed of God in this two-fold sense, to represent the corresponding parts in the covenant. And I question not but that the self- same principle would run through every other part. The land of Canaan, for instance, was included in the covenant ; and being a goodly land, " a land flowing," as the Scripture expresseth it, '' with milk and honey ; a good land, a land of brooks of water, of fountains, and depths, that spring out of the vallies and hills ; a land of wheat, and barley, and vines, and fig-trees, and pomegranates, of oil-olive, and honey ; a land wherein there was bread without scarceness, and lack of no- thing ; whose stones wei-e iron, and out of whose hills thou mayest dig brass * ;" I doubt not but that many of the carnal Israelites, having got possession of it, though not by their own power or might, would yet bless themselves for the goodness of their fortune, and say of it, Tliis is our rest, here ivill we stay. But, ah ! to the spiritually-minded, Canaan, with all her fair prospects, was still incapable of satisfying the longing desires of their soul. Viewed as their only portion, it was lighter than vanity. It was totally destitute of :^ny real good, except when taken in connexion with ^- J)cut. viii. 7,~9. 38 THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT^ the chief good, and as affording types and shadows of better things to come. And Tience, to the former, the threatening to dispossess them of a portion they so highly valued, in case of disobedience, would be ^ex- ceedingly terrific^ as the idea would be of coming short of the rest which it typified, to the latter. 2. We mentioned a test of ofediince as a second design of the ordinance. In the 9th verse, God requires of Abraham to keep his covenant ; thou, saith he, and thy seed after thee^ in their generations. And in the next verse, he informs them what it was he required of them, and how they were to testify the obedience of their faithf by observing, as a perpetual statute^ the or- dinance of circumcision. *^ This is my covenant, ■which ye shall keep between me and you, and thy seed after thee ; every man-child among you shall be circumcised." Thus was it a test of their obedience ; and see with what an awful sanction it was enforced : ver. 14-. " And the uncircumcised man-child, whose flesh of his fore- skin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people ; he hath broken my covenant *." * 1. Some mav be apt to think this an exceedingly hard law. But as the conduct here supposed, evidently indicated a contenTipt of the- divine authority, amounting to a breach of covenant on the part of the offender, the apparent severity of the sanction vanishes entirely. 2. P. would seem also to appear from iVJs passage, that it vms tlie uncircumcised subject himself, who w.a^ to sufler for the bfeach of God's holy covenant ; and as this might happen to au infant of little niqre than eight days old, it would add not a little 10 the idea of its severity. But from what is said gf Moses iiv- the fourth chapter of Exodus, concerning the circumcision of his spn, it is manifest that, God acted, even in this, in the most rea- sonable manner. When the subject was an infant, as in the case htre alluded to, then it was the parent's sin, and he v/as of course THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 39 3. Again, this ordinance being instituted at the time that the promise of a Saviour was restricted to a parti- cular family, and abrogated when this promise came to be accoinplit.hed^ we should suppose that a third design of its institution was to point to this event. And this it did by constituting a kind of national distinction between the progenitors of the Saviour, and the other nations of the WQild. Hence we read of the uncircumcised Phili' stifjesy EdomiteSy Amonites^ ^.nd Moabites*^ &c. And hence Paul, in his epistles, repeatedly uses the words circumcision and uncircumcision^ in the same manner as he does those of Jew and Gentile^ or Jeiu and Greck^ as comprehending the whole human race f . — It would da to be responsible ; but, when an adult, the sin would lie at his own door, and he was therefore to be answerable. The whole then evidently amounts to this, to secure obedience to the holy com- mandments of God, and to shew thai it is an evil thing, and bitter, to depart from him, even in any instance whatsoever. * Judges xiv. 3. Jer. ix. 26. We meet with a hint in Brown's Dictionary, Perth edit, respecting this subject, worth the noticing. It is there said, * For the last 3S years of the Kraelites' abode iu ' the desert, the Hebrew children were not circumcised. It was * not there so necessary to distinguish them from other nations,* &c. See art. Circum. The following quotation from Josephus, the Jewish historian, tends to corroborate this idea most forcibly. His words are, ' The fore-mentioned son (Ishmael) was born to * Abraham when he w^s eighty-six years old. But when he was * ninety-nine, God appeared to him, and promised him that he ' should have a son by Sarai, and commanded that his name should ' he Isaac ; and shewed him, that from this son should spring great * nations and kings, and that they should obtain all the land of Ca- * naan by war, from Sldon to Egypt. But he charged him, in order ' to keep his posterity unmixed with others, that they should be cir- * cumiised in the flesh of their foreskin, and that this should be done ' on the eighth day after they were, born.' Vid. Jewish Antiq. B. I. c. X. § 5. f Gal. ii. 7, 8, 9. Rom, i\ . 11, 12. & al. freq. 40 THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANTl this also^ first, bj being restricted to the males, it would shew that the promised seed was to be a male ; and then, by cutting off, first the Berithy or the animals se- lected at the ratification of the covenant, chap. xy. 9. and then the foreskin of the males throughout their ge- nerations, it would point out the cutting off of the pro- mised seed, God's true Berith^ whose blood was to cleanse from all sin, 1 John i. 7. 4. And this brings us to remark further, concerning the design of the ordinance, that it seems to have had yet a higher and more spiritual signification, even to the persons who practised it, and denoted the cutting off of the sins of the flesh. Hence it was used figurative- iy by the prophets, to signify the circumcision of the heart *. And hence Paul's remarkable words, " f He is not a Jew who is one outwardly, neither is t-iat cir- cumcision which is outward in the flesh ; but he is a Jew who is one inwardly : and circumcision is that of the heurt, in the spirit, and not in the letter,- whose praise is not of men, but of God." Not that the apo- stle is here denying that the literal circumcision ivas circumcision, nor yet that the descendents of Abraham^ who had this mark literally in their flesh, ivere his de- scendents, (so I take the word Jew here to signify), but he is drawing a contrast between this kind of de- scent^ and this kind of circumcision, and that which is spiritual^ in the heart, and not in the letter, as the whole connexion evidently shews. It is therefore evi- dent, that the words circumcisicfi and uncircumcision^ in the spiritual sense as well as in the literal, are used as collective nouns, and in this sense ai-e just synonymous with believer and unbeliever, righteous and wicked, and so on. Upon the whole then, if these two last views be cor- * Jer.iv. 4. Deut.x.lG. t Rom. il. ?8, 29. THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. ^l tect^ what a beautiful harmony does it shew us in the truth of God ! an order and necessity of things Which has existed, and will exist, even from the beginning to the end. It shews, that ivithottt the shedding of blood there could he no remhsion^ and that even then, except men were converted, and became new creatures, circuiU'- clsed in the heart as well as in the flesh, their literal cir- cumcision or connection with Abraham, or even with their Messiah, a greater than Abraham, could profit them nothing. . We might now speak, of the subjects of this ordi- nance, but we conceive it will be better to reserve this, with the things wc have already mentioned, to the fol- lowing "chapter. In the 15th verse, Sarah's name is changed from Sa~ rai to Sarah. This change of her name is just similar to that which was made on Abraham's ; and though neither differed essentially from what they were before, yet this new adjunct is very important in its nature, and wonderfully assimilates the one to the other. As Abram signifies a father^ or father of elevation^ and Abraham the father of a multitude^ so Sarai signifies a lady or princess, and Sarah a princess of a multitude. Accordingly, ver. 16. God saith to Abraham concern- ing her, as lie had formerly done , concerning himself, / nvill bless her, and give thee a son also of her ; yeoy I ijuill bless her^ and she shall be a mother of many nations : kings of people shall be of iter. At this gracious promise, Abraham, wh6 had been going sorrowful on account of being childless, ch. xv. 2, 3. was so overcome with joy^ that he fell prostrate on the ground, and gave yent to the feelings of his heart by laughter ; and he said within himself, Shall a child he horn tojiimthat is an hundred years old ! and shall "- ■ ' F ■ 42 THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. Sara/i, ivho is ninety^ bear ! ver. 17. Tes^ saith the Lord; Sarah, thy wife, shall hear thee a son indeed ; for nothing is impossible with me *. And thou shalt call his name Isaac ; and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlastifig covenant, and with his seed after him, ver. 19. Abraham had been . expressing, ver. 18. his anxious solicitude, that Lhmael might live ■ before God. Which expression I take to mean, from the connexion in which it occurs, a desire that he might be included amongst God's people, and have a place in the covenant or promise which respected the numerous seed f. This I think, evident, from the answer given in the wordi just quoted respecting Isaac, and from what occurs in the verse following. * No, my friend, Abraham,' as if God should have said $ '• no, this cannot be ; it ' would overturn the whole plan of my dealings with ' thee. Not with Ishmael, therefore, but with Isaac * will I establish my covenant, and with his seed after * him. And as for Ishmael, lo I I have heard thee even 'concerning him. Lo ! I have blessed him also, and 'will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceed- ' ingly. Twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make ' of bim a great nation. But notwithstanding this, mark * what follows. Though I shall be thus munificent to ' Ishmael, because he is thy seedy ch. xxii. 13. remem- * ber that I do-not include him in my covenant; but * my covenant will I establish with Isaac, whom Sarah » shall bear uftto thee at this set time in the next year J.* ver. 1^,20,21. ' - * Gen. xviii. 14. f Before thee. It is the same word as that used in the first com- naandment, and which certainly, there at least, Atnoits the fare er presence of God, in a peculiar sense. See Park. Heb. licx. un- •ier niC, and IV. \ t Here it may be proper to remark, that Pcdobaptists,scemipg- THE ABRAHAMIC COVEITANT. iS The next transaction of God with Abraham, is con- tained in the xxiid chapter, after the account of the of- fering up of his son Isaac, ver. 15, 16, 17, 18. Atfd the }y with a view to support their system, give this whole account tc- spectijig Ishmael, though I do not suppose they intend it, a very false gloss. They first take it for g- anted that Ishirael was i.-t tlie covenant, or the church, which, in their kense of the words, cer- lainly signify the same thing ; and then, that by mocking at the wean- ing of Isaac, they represent him as having apostatized, for which jeason they suppose him to have been cast put. But do we- not see fr.om the account of the sacred historian, that it is not true that he was ever in the covenant; and even thqugh it .bad be.en irue, still, would not the principle be false? for where do .we ikad, in all the account of Ishmael's separation, any thing ^anajogoos to the approved scriptural discipline of a church ? The wljo}e ac- count of this matter is contained in the xxist chapter of .Genesis ; and let any one read it with attentiun, marking every circum- stance there narrated concerning Hagar and Ishmael, particularly God's own tender dealings toward them, as well as Abraham'sanxj- ous solicitude for the welfare of his s.on, and s?ty, if it be-possible, that thfse two persons were cast out as heathens and publicans from the church of God. Did not the authority whicji ordained exclusion from the church, ordain al§o certain steps to be taken, previous to this last expedient ? But where do we find any thing like this occurring here ? The truth perhaps is, the mistake may hdve origin-ated in a wrong interpretation of what the apostle 55ys on this subjeict> in his epistle to the Galatians. See chap. iv..ftbm ver. 22. to the end. The apostief declares that the whole wad allegorical. He speaks of two covenants, the one from Mount Sinai, the other from Mount Sion ; the one answering to the Jerusalem which then was, the other to the Jerusalem which is above. The one was in bondage, the other free. And as that which is free was to succeed that which was in bondage, so Abra- ham's wives aiid sons came to be the most appropriate embldmj by which to represent such important matters. And thus do we see verified what we formerly observed from DrMacknight,^ that * the characters, actions and events, which constituted the natural * allegory, though existing apparently in the ordinary course of < things, were ordered of God, so as to be fit emblems of those * future persons and events,' which should occur in the course ot 44 THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. angel of the Lord called unto Abraham out of heaven the se- cond iime^ and said, Bt/ tnyself have I sivorn, saith the Lord ; for because thou hast done this thingy and hast not ivithheld thy son^ thine only son ,• that in blessing I ivill blesf thee^ and in multiplijing I ivill multiplij thy seed as the divine providence. — In interpreting subjects of this nature then, we shall certainly err, unless we take the allegorical represen- tation into account. And we shall err eveii' here, if we make the original emblem speak more than what the particular thing it was intended to represent, requires. Gfoing upon this principle in the case before us, it would be no difficult matter to demonstrate, that ev«n the Abrahamic covenant was completely abrogated. For if Ishmael was in this covenant, and if he was cast out, the apostle is pfoving that the circumstance of his expulsion was em- blematical of the expulsion of the Jews from the church of the living God ; yea, of a complete overturn of their whole system. Or, upon another view, it would even prove that they were nevei in this covenant, if so be that it is the gospel covenant, which maketh free iji Christ Jesus ; for it was as *o«(i' persons that they were cast out, persons reseinbling Ishmael, the son of a bond-mRid, and not as the descendents of Isaac, the son of the free woman, and child of the promise. Thus, upon their own principles, not- withstanding their contentions about the Abrahamic covenant, iiud about the interest they assign to his descendents therein, from this chapter, upon their view of the matter, we are compelled to confess, that there was a lapse of nearly two thousand years — tcfi witj from the time of Abraham to the coming of the Messiah, '.in which there was not a single individual included, in it. . Thfey were all that time in the situation of Ishmael, and as if they had been born of the bond-woman, and not of Sarah, who was free. I mention these things, merely to shew how easy it is, by plausi- ble representations, to pervert the Scriptures, and also to demon- .>;tr«fe the necessity of adopting right principles of interpretation. Is it not then making the sign speak more than the thing signified requires, to raise such a theory upon the circumstance of Ish- mael's expulsion ? He was cast out, it is true ; but from what- c\'er cause that might have been, all that we need to attend to here is, that this event prefigured the great change which was to take place in the then existing dispensation. THE ABRAKAMIC COVENANT. 4?5 slat's of the heaven^ and as the sand which is tfpon the sea shore ; and thy seed shall possess the gates of his enemies ; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed^ hecause^ihou hast obeyed jny voice. This renewal of the promise, as the reward of the faith and obedience of. Abraham, differs b\it little from what has been already observed. The blessing and the numerous seed are the same, only the reduplication of the words, that in blessing I will bless theey and in mnltt' plying I will multiply thy seed, and the comparison that they should be as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand upon the sea shore, may be applied both to the spiritual and literal Israel. The first is an Hebrewism, denoting in general the superlative number, and may be transla- ted greatly bless, or greatly multiply. The second is quoted by Paul from the prophecies of Isaiah indeed, in his epistle to the Romans, chap. ix. 27. and applied to the.descendents of Abraham accordincr to the flesh. The next expression, iJiy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies, is evidently a prediction, not only of the victories to be obtained over the Canaanitish nations by the Israelitish arms, but also of the spiritual con- quests of the Redeemer, the seed of Abraham by emi- nence, as is manifest, amongst other passages, from the 2d verse of the cxth Psalm. The last article runs thus : and in thy seed shall all the ngtietis of the earth be blessed, ver. 18. This is precisely of the same import to what was expressed, chap. xii. 3. where it: is said, " in tliee," that is is to say, in Abra- ham, " shall all the families of the earth be blessed." Only here we are informed, that it was not in Abra- ham personally, but in his seed, that this blessedness wan to take place. , And who this seed was, we are not left to doubt, since an inspired apostle explains it at great length to be Christ. See Rom. iv. and G-al. iii. Ani 46 GENERAL OBSERVATIONS this again accounts for what Christ himself says*, that *" Abraham rejoiced to see his day;" and that " he saw it, and was glad." Having thus completed our design respecting our comment on this important subject, before we proceed to the discussion of the other topics we proposed, we would make a few general remark? upon the whole. But having already enlarged so much, we shall leave this to be the subject of a sepa;:ate section. SECTION VI. General Observations on the foregoing Sections, JlIaving finished what we intended by way of com* ment on the various transactions of God with Abra- ham, we shall now make a few general remarks upon the whole. I. Our first general remark then is, that these vari.. ous transactions, though consisting of many parts, seem to constitute but one covenant. Indeed, I confess titiy^ self disposed to look upon them in no other light than as a further development of the first promise, Gen. iii. 15. and intended principally to promote its accomplish- ment. For which reason, I candidly acknowledge that I cannot but differ from Mr M'Lean, an author how- ever for whom 1 feel very much respect, both for making what is called the covenatH of circumcision a co- venant distinct by itself and also for taking such a view of the subject as to render it necessary for him to do hO. He is of opinion, or rather asserts it as an incoii- ^overtible fact, * that the Scriptures speak of more cc- * John viii. 56, ON THE FOREGOING SECTIONS. 4-7 * venants than one being made with Abraham.' Ac- cordingly, after declaring that * he knows no difference * between a simple promise, and a promissory covenant,- * save that the latter was usually confirmed by sacri- * fice, oath, &.c. j' — he endeavours to make out no less than three distinct covenants in the transactions with Abraham * : the first consisting of the promise of all nations beiiig blessed in him ; the second, that of the land of Canaan ; and the third, the covenant of circum- cision. Nowi, upon the hypothesis that there is no dif- ference between a simple promise and a promissory co- venant, it will hence follow that, as all covenants are promises, so all promises are covenants • and therefore, instead of limiting even those given to Abraham to the number of three, we should have no fewer than sixco- venants, all in their nature fully as distinct as those specified by Mr M'Lean. There would be, 1 . The pro- mise or covenant of blessing Abraham personally; 2. That of blessing all nations in him. 3. The promise or covenant of a carnal seed. 4'. That of a spiritual. 5. The promise of the land of Canaan* And lastly, the promise that Jehovah would be a God to Abraham, and to his Seed after him. And to these, if you please, you might add a seventh, if indeed it be pro- per to view it as distinct from the others, to-witj the rite of circumcision. And, moreover, by apply- ing this rule to Other parts of Scripture, what a mul- tiplicity of covenants should we there behold, and what a detached, and at the same time complicated system should we make those lively oracles, which are so remarkably distinguished for their simplicity ! But really, might not all Mr McLean's difficulties on this head, in a great measure vanish, by attending, besides •what we have said above, to the following considera* * Sec his Review of Mr Wardlaw's Lectures, pp. 16, 17. 48 GENERAL OBSERVATIONS tion, namelj, that it is bj no means the case that tht inspired writers speak of this covenant always, if in- deed at all, in the j}/ural number ; for the apostle Peter, in addressing his countrymen the Jews, Acts iii. 25. says expressly, " Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, ■iaying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed." Nor will it do to explain this away by the detaching- scheme, by saying, that it is but one of the coveniints of which the apostle is here speaking, to-wit, that of blessing all nations in Abraham. For, first, though it should be said that the covenant in this passage means only that spiritual co- venant which had respect to believers of all nations, as well as those amongst the Jews ; yet still let it be con- sidered, in the next place, to whom it was that the apo- stle addressed these words, and what was the situation, in respect to the covenant, in which he placed them. They were Jews indeed, but they were unconverted Jews ; yet because Jews, they are styled the children of the pro- phets, and of the covenant which God made with theii- fathers, &c. And as to the two passages which Mr McLean produces, Rom.ix. 4. and Eph. ii. 12. where the words occur in the plural, it is yet to be proved ■whether the Abrahamic covenant is the only covenant there spoken of ; and till this be done, nothing decisive can be drawn from hence. I remarked further, that I differed from Mr McLean for another reason, namely, that of taking such a view of this subject^ in connexion with baptism, as to in- volve himself in a kind of necessity to do as he has done. For my part, I do not conceive that there is any call for having recourse to such methods of interpreta- tion, to establish the point at issue between him and his opponents, as I hope to make appear in its proper ON THE FOREGOING SECTIONS. 49 place. Even a bad cause, it must be confessed, may be rendered exceedingly specious by improper means j but where the cause is good, there is surely no tempta- tion to have recourse to doubtful disputation in support of it. Upon the whole then, is not the plan of viewing tlie various transactions of God with Abraham as but one covenant, and as having the most immediate connexion with the revelation which went before, much more sim- ple and satisfying to the mind, than that of ranging them all into so many separated and detached portions. Yea, I am convinced, that the more we view a unity of na- ture and design in the revelations of God, we shall be both the better qualified to interpret them, and the greater blessedness will they convey to our souls. 2. But we would remark, in the next place, thai though we contend for a unity in these transactions, we are by no means for discarding a due discrimination be- tiveen their various parts. Yea, this is the very princi- ple upon which we have endeavoured to proceed, and it seems as if absolutely necessary to a right understand- ing of the subject. We have already seen, that these transactions consist of various parts, and that spiritual and carnal, heavenly and earthly, temporal and eternal properties are, in these transactions, equally applicable to the blessings and to their subjects. If Abraham was to be blessed, the blessing of him personally did not exclude those who were also to be blessed in him — if he was to have a seed by natural descent, this did not interfere with that which he should have also by faith — if temporal blessings were promised to him, these did not necessarily limit his expectation from the hope of better things to come. In all these respects, we see the parts of a covenant, which, though very G so GENERAL OBSERVATIONS different in their nature, are all at the same time indts-* pensably necessary ; even the most carnal, temporary, and insignificant, if I may use the expression, no less proper for the constituting of the whole, than the most spiritual, durable, and important. 3. This leads us to remai-k, in the third place, the design ivhy things so very opposite in their nature should yet be included in one and the same covenant. The articles we consider particularly of this description arc, a carnal posterity^ and carnal possessions in a certain land. These were both neiv articles, sealed and conveyed in these transactions. And the reason or design of them we have indeed hinted at before, but we shall now be a little more particular. The promise given to our first parents immediately upon the fall, may be considered as containing the whole gospel in embryo. And as it contained the promise of a seed, evidently a partake? of the human nature, (so I consider the expression, *' the seed of the woman," to mean), it was therefore necessary, from the very nature of the thing, that some plan should be afterwards revealed to promote its ac- complishment. Such a plan I accordingly consider the covenant of Abraham to be. And, as by the first pro- mise, we were led to expect a Saviour, who should par- ticipate of our nature, so here we see provision made for its fulfilment. All the reasons then which prompt- ed God to devise such a constitution in the plan of mercy, as that the Saviour of the world should be man^ form just so many reasons for appointing Abraham's natural posterity, in a certain sense, to be his peculiar people, till the seed came. The same reasons are also applicable to their possessions of the land of Canasm. If there had been no design, such as we have mention- ed, on the part of God, why does he introduce, in such a remarkable manner, the natural posterity of Abra- ON THE FOREGOING SECTIONS. 51 liam, and withal give them, not a promise merelj-, but actual possession of the land of Canaan for many cen- turies afterwards, till the great promise was accom- plished ; and then, from that period down to the px-e-- sent day, — a space nearly as long, — should scatter them among the other nations of the earth, without any - certain dwelling'place ? To deny our principle, and yet to account in a sober and rational manner for these things, I conceive impossible. But admit|fng the prin- ciple, what a satisfaction does it afford to the mind, and how reasonable and important does it represent all the ways of God, as flowing from a wisdom which is in- scrutable as It is unerring. Upon this principle, even a carnal -posterity, and even the land of Canaan, a car- nal inheritance, both which, viewed in themselves, arc indeed blessings not to be despised, but when contrast- ed with spiritual and eternal objects, are lighter than vanity ; acquire a magnitude and importance well enti- tling them to attention. A carnal posterity, if it be a blessing to a man, by not suffering his memory to pe- rish from the earth, is unspeakably more so, when, through this natural descent, He was to come, on whom the hopes of the whole world, from the beginning to the end, were to centre. And carnal possessions too, if they be a blessing to men, considered as individuals, by affording a regular supply of their returning wants, they were doubly more so to the people of Israel, con- sidered as a nation ; yea, and to all other nations through their means, by serving as a great receptacle which might keep them together, and preserve them a distinct people from all the other nations of the earth, and thus laying a foundation for confirming the great promise, when it actually came to be accomplished, be- yond all doubt. Whereas, if they had been allowed to mingle with the other nations of the earth, or if n9 52 GENERAL OBSERVATIONS ^ certain portion of the earth had been assigned them for an habitation, but had been destined all along to wan- der and rove about in the manner thej do at present ; under what different circumstances should we have had the whole accomplishment of this great event present- ed to us ? Trulj, if we but rightly understood the matter, instead of contending with one another, we would bless the Lord, first, for appointing even Abra- ham's natural seed^ for securing the birth of the long expected Saviour j and then, for the granting to them the inheritance even of the land of Canaan, which, by their possessing for so long a period, both themselves and all the world might know Jems of Nazareth to be He. 4. This leads us of course, to a fourth reflection, which regards the dealings of God •with the descendents of Abraham in after times. We have seen the promise li- mited, in the family of Abraham to Isaac, and in Isaac's family to Jacob ; and even though both parents; seemed desirous in their turn to have it otherwise *, yet God's eternal purpose and decree would by no means » permit it. We have now to observe, that no limitation of this nature, though it was so numerous, ever took place in the family of Jacob. He had children by con- cubines as well as by his lawfully married wives, and that even to the number of twelve sons, most of whom manifested as much wickedness and opposition to God, as did either Ishmael or Esau, yet notwithstanding, they were all counted the children of the promise, and were honoured ever afterwards to be the twelve heads of the tribes or families of Israel. There is nothing like that of absolute rejection, or similar to that of Ishmael's or Esau's, ever took place in this family at any period. It is true, God was often displeased with them on ac- count of their rebellions, and often threatened to pi;- * Gen. xvii. 18. See p. 42. and ch. xxvii. ON THE FOREGOING SECTIONS. oo nish them^ yea, and often put those threatenlngs into execution ; but it is equally true, that though he slew the fathers, eyen in thousands, he still preserved their children, and retained them still a distinct people from all the nations of the earth. Though thousands, and tens of thousands, on various occasions, fell by fhe sword, the famine or the pestilence, yet the family, strictly speaking, was still preserved, because a bless- ing was in it. It is remarkable too, that when the purposes of- God came to be more fully disclosed, and the promise of the Saviour was restricted to a particular trih, that his pro- vidence seems to have been exercised for the preservation of that tribe in a particular manner. By the prophe- tic impulse which operated on Jacob immediately before liis death, he was enajjled to foretel many things which afterwards came to pass, and among others, that the Messiah, under the designation of Shiloh, was to come of the tribe of Judah*. And what was more astonish- ing still, the prediction of the destination of the land, which was afterwards div^ided by lot, was such' as tend- ed much to secure to Judah the accomplishment of this promise. When we consider therefore the awful strug- gle for supremacy between the ten tribes, and the tribes of Judah and Benjamin, we cannot sufficiently admire the local situation of the tribe of Judah, as the wisest of projects that could be possibly devised for effecting what was thus intended. Nor is it undeserving of no- tice, that Jeroboam^ the first king of the revolt from the house of Judah, evidently saw through this. And therefore, in order to' prevent the bad effects, as he sup- posed, which might flow from the subjects of his king- clom going up to v.'orship at Jerusalem, he erected tw» calves, placing the one in Dan, and the other in Betli-el, ,-ind desired the people to go and worship there, under * Gen. xlix. 10. 54- GENERAL OBSERVATIONS pretext that It was too much for them to go so far as Jerusalem *. But this became a sin unto Israel j and, as it was a matter of mere human device, it soon came to nothing ; and Jerusalem was still the place to which the tribes, the tribes of ^ the Lord, went up. Accord- ingly, when the prophet Ahrjahf intimated the Lord's determination to cut oflf Jeroboam, it was at the same time declared, that he should never want a man to sit on the throne of David. Though the sin of Solomon had been so provoking as to occasion the rending of the ten tribes from the house of Judah, yet, as neither the origi-nal grant of the promise, nor its accomplishment, depended in the smallest on human merit, it was not therefore considered as a reason why the Lord should repent him of what he had purposed. As he had de- clared by the mouth of his holy prophets, that the Mes- siah should come of the tribe of Judah, his faithfulness was engaged to make it good, provided the promisq was not conditional %. We may observe too, that God's care over this par- ticular tribe, was further illustrated in the different cap- tivities with which he visited them on account of their sins. There were various captivities of the Hebrews, both before and in the time of their kings, which, for the sake both of illustrating the subject we are now upon, and for giving the reader one connected view of * 1 Kings xii. 26,-29. t 1 Kings xiv- 7, — 16. comp. with ch. xi. 30, — 39. X See the original grant of thii'' promise to the house of Davitf^ recorded in the viith chapter of the 2d book of Samuel, from ver. 12. to 16. An account which remarkably accords with the facts stated in the passages to which we have referred in the 1st book of Kings. It is also expressly applied to the Lord Jesus Christ, as the grand and ultimate object of the whole, in the first chapter of the Gospel by Luke, ver. 32, 33. which passages see. ON THE FOREGOING SECTIONS. 55 them, it may not be improper here, briefly to enume- rate. The various wars which fell out between them and the surrounding nations, in whicli at any time they happened to be defeated, and part of them, more or less, taken prisoners, are reckoned so many captivities of that people. See several of a more partial nature in the passages mentioned in the margin *<— These were the captivities under the government of the Judges ,- but those which happened afterwards, under that of the kings, were of a still more serious nature. It was not till Solomon had sinned, in leading the people into idolatry, that the Lord rent the ten tribes out of his hand. Nor was it till Jeroboam had com- mitted a similar trespass, that the government of the ten tribes was also taken from him and his family for ever, and invested in the hands of Baasha f . But we see in the case both of Israel and of Judah, that sin is a leaven, which, when once begun to operate, will not be impeded in its progress, till it has pervaded the whole mass. Neither the signal displeasure manifest- ed by the Lord against the house of Judah, in rending the ten tribes out of their hands, nor yet that against Israel, in the case of Jeroboam, were sufficient to deter that people from walking in ways of their own choo- sing. Being even mad on idolatry, the then prevailing sin of the whole world, they dared to persist in the practice of it at all hazards. For which cause, the Lord not only afflicted them with internal commotions among themselves, but brought up foreign enemies against them, who discomfited them in battle, plunder- ed their treasuries, and led most of them captives to distant lands. The principal captivities with which they were vi- sited subsequent to this period, v/exe,Jirst, those which * Judgtiiiii.iv.vi. ' f 1 Kingsxv. 27.29.30. 56 GEKERAL OBSERVATIONS happened to the kingdom of Israel^ first by Tiglath-PiJ- laser, king of Assyria, in the reign of Pekah, king of Israel *, then by Shalmaneser, about nineteen years af- terwards, who came up against Samaria, and having be- sieged, he took it, and carried Israel away captives, and dispersed them throughout various provinces of the As- sijriun empire \ , And thus, it is generatly conjectu- red, a termination was put to the kingdom of Israel ; for the tea tribes, who were thus taken captives, are sup- posed never to have returned. Aad indeed we never read of another king reigning in Israel after Hoshea, under whose reign this defeat and captivity took jjlace. StcGndltj, the captivities of Judah. As to these, there ■were several of a lesser or partial nature, prior to that great and decisive one effected by Nebuchadnezzar, and known by the captivity of the seventy years. In the fifth year of king Rehoboam, son of Solomon, Shishak, king of Egypt, came up against Jerusalem with a mighty army j and, having reduced the city, he took away the treasures of the house of the Lord, and of the king's house, and the shields of gold which Solo- mon had made^' Again, in the reign of good king Hezehiah^ there was a most dreadful attempt made by Sennacherib, king of Assyria, against Jerusalem ; but the faith and prayer of that pious prince, and of the prophet Isaiah., were the means of preserving Jerusalem from the formida- ble forces of the enemy ^. Subsequent to this, however, in ihe several reigns of Jthoiakim., JeJwiakin^ and Zedekiah^ the three last kings * 2 Kings XV. 29. -f 2 Kings xviii. 9, 10, 1 J, 32. t Compare 1 Kings xiv. 25, 26. with 2 Chron. xii. 2, — 4- § Compare 2 Kings xviii. 17,-37. and chap. xix. with 2 Gliron. xxxii, lj~^23. ON THE J-OREGOING SECTIOInS. 5l who reigned in Jerusalem, did Nebuchadnezzar as of- ten reduce the city, plundering and spoiling it of all its precious substance. The account of the first, to- wit, the overthrow of Jehoiakim, is recorded in the begin- ning of the xxivth chapter of the 2d book of Kings. The words are remarkable. Ver. 2. ** And the Lord brought against him bands of the Chaldees, and bands of the children of Ammon ; he sent them against Ju- dah to destroy it, according to the word of the Lord, which he spuke by his servants the prophets. Surely, at the commandment of the Lord came this upon Ju- dah, to remove them out of his sight, for the sin of Manasseh, according to all that he did ; and also for the innocent blood which he shed, (for he filled Jerusalem with innocent blood), which the Lord would not par- don." The same chapter contains an account of the disas- ters of the second also. In the 10th verse, it is said, " At that time," three months to-wit after Jehoiakin's accession to the throne, ver. 8. *'the servants of Ne- buchadnezzar, king of Babylon, came up against Jeru- salem, and the city was besie;ed." Ver. 12. *< And Je- hoiakin, the king of Judah, went out to the king of Babylon, he, and his mother, and his servants, and his princes, and his officers, and he took them prisoners. And he carried thence all the treasures of the house qf the Lord, and the treasures of the king's house, and cut in pieces ull the vessels of gold, which Solomon, king of Israel had made m he temple of the Lord, as the Lord -had said. And he carried away all Jerusalem, and all t c princes, and all the mighty men of valour, even ten thousand captives, and all the craftsmen and smiths : /.one remained save the poorest sort of the people of the land," &.c This was the captivity under Jehoiakin. H oS GENERAL OBSERVATIONS But the severest of all is that we have yet to notice^ which happened in the reign of Zedekiah. This wa5< the seventy years captivity^ predicted by the prophet Je- remiah several years before it came to pass *. It con- sisted in a total overthrow of the whole Jewish state. Jerusalem was burnt to ashes, and the whole country laid waste ; Zedekiah himself taken prisoner ; his chil^ dren slaughtered before his eyes j his eyes put out, fet- tered with chains, and carried to Babylon f, &.c. Such was the unhappy end of both these contending parties, Israel and Jitdah. Having both provoked the Lord, the Lord in his own time punished both of them thus signally ; but yet, we mu§t say, it was still infi- nitely less than their iniquitie^ deserved. Amidst all the severity of chastisement, however, the tenderness of his care over tJiat tribe of whom the Messiah was to spring, is truly conspicuous. We may say h^re, as our blessed Lord did on another occasion : ' Suppose ye ' that the ten tribes who were first carried captives into ' strange lands, and were never permitted to return, ' were sinners above X the other two tribes, who after- ' wards suffered the same fate, but who were destined ' to a captivity only of seventy years ? / tell you^ nay ,- ' but so it happened, in order to shew forth the wonder- * ful works of God.' Whatever might be the cause for his not restoring the ten tribes, we are furnished * Jer. XXV. 11, 12. It may be objected by infidels, that, a^' the prediction of this event happened so shortly before the period of its accomplishment, the whole might be written afterwards imder a pretext of divme prescieTice. But let it be observed, that not only the captivity, but their restoration is predicted by the pro- phet, and the f^rm of their captivity limited, with the greatest precision, to seventy years : considerably previous to which period, this prophet was numbered with his fathers. t 2 Kings XXV. I Lukexiii, 2. ON THE FOREGOING SECTIONS, 59 with reasons the most sufficient for his recalling the captivity of Judah, *' as streams in the south ;" and for " filling their mouth with laughter, aud their tongues with singing, when they could say among the heathen, that the Lord had done great things for them*." His wrath was not only thus pacified toward themi fasr all^ that they had done, but they were going again to take possession of that inheritance to which they had a right by the promise to Abraham ; they were going to re- store their ancient worship, to rear again the palaces of Sion, to repair the waste places, and the desolations of many generations ; they were going <' to declare the name of the Lord in Sion, and his piaise in Jerusa- lem f" — JVr«/o/(?OT, to which '' the people are gathered together, and the kingdoms, to serve the Lord," to serve hirfty till Hf came for whom all the promises were made, and broke down eveiy such distinction, teaching, that henceforth they should neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father ; but that, through all the wgrld, wherever the true worshippers were^ tAerf he was to be worshipped in spirit and i;i truth, John iv. 2 1.23. This, we conceive, was th-e gi"eat end for which the promise was ever given ; and the dispersion and total loss of the ten tribes, while the others were restored, and preserved for so long 3 series of years, eveii till the promise came to be actuaDy accomplished, seems to con- firm it beyond a doubt. 5. The jpiritual genius and nature of the promises of the Abrahamic covenant, and which indeed ran throt?gh the whole of the former dispensation, will form the basis of our next reflection. And this we consider to be the more necessary, as there are not wanting those who have spoken of it in the most contemptuous man- * rsal.cxKvi, f Fial.cii.21.22. 60 GENERAL OBSERVATIONS ner, and who seem to glory in ascribing to it the Epi- thets of carnal^ worldly^ earthly^ typical^ and so on, as if there had been almost nothing spiritual in it, or as if the way to eternal life, under that dispensation, had been so wrapt up in metaphorical and dark, sayings, that not one amongst a million could possibly discern it. We indeed confess it to be true, that the apostle Paul, par- ticularly in his epistle to the Hebrews, speaking of that dispensation, employs such terms ; but it is not in the same sweeping sense that many of his thoughtless imi- tators have unwittingly adopted, as persons contending for the mastery. None could have a juster view than that holy and spiritual apostle, of the carnal and world- ly nature of the services of the tabernacle and temple j but we shall woefully mistake his meaning if we infer from thence, that life and immortality, said to be brought to light by the gospel, were not sufficiently made known to save thousands, and tens of thousands, even under that dispensation, dark as it was. For my part, when I read the Old Testament Scriptures, and, behold the uniform piety and trust in God, manifested by many of the saints therein recorded, and that in the most common affairs of life, I cannot help thinking that Christians in these times, notwithstanding all the light they enjoy, have reason to blush and to be ashamed for coming so far short of what was known and practised even by the ancients. We are fully sensible indeed, that that dispensation did contain promises of a carnal nature ; and that tem- poral possessions in the land of Canaan, temporal deli- verances from the Egyptian yoke, and temporal threat- enings in case of disobedience, formed very important parts thereof. But upon the supposition that these were its principal matters, as the apostle says respecting the law, so may we say'concerning the pronjise, " Where-? • N THE FOREGOING SECTIONS. 61 fore then serveth the promise* ?" Of what avail was it to Abraham to be told, that though the fair land of Ca- naan could not be given to himself, yet his descendents at a verj distant period should possess it ? Was there any thing in such a promise, if you divest it of all spi- ritual ideas, that could possibly support the mind of any- one ? or was it at all a compensation worthy of God to 'bestow, for all the severe trials, difficulties and hard- ships, which Abraham had been called to endure in all his peregrinations in strange lands ? To have remained in Ur of the Chaldees, in liis father's house, and among his own kindred, or to have returned when he found himself so sadly disappointed — surely either of the ttvo had been more desirable than the other. But Abraham did not think so. He chose his wandering life because it was the will of God, and because there were assu- rances given him that it should not be always so. For even while he sojourned as a pilgrim upon earth, dwell- ing in tabernacles or tents, slender moveable abodes, which could hardly shelter their inhabitants either from the inclemency of the weather, or from the ravages of savage beasts, and which could be struck and carried about with them whithersoever they went — while this was his situation, we say, and while he endured it with patience, *' he looked for a «Vy," an object forming a contrast to the state he was then in, a city which hath foundations^ sure and immoveable basis, and not like the stakes and cordsy which were necessary to bind his then habitation to the earth, *' a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God\.''^ This, this was the object which bore up his mind. And it must have been spiritual and heavenly in its nature, for it was not to lie enjoyed here ; for here " he had no possessions, no, * Gal.iii.l9. \ Hcb. xK 10. 62 GENERAL OBSERVATIONS not SO much as to set his foot on *," save the cave of Machpelah, wliich he purchased of the sons of Heth, in which to burj his dead f. Nor was Abraham singular in his expectations of eternal blessedness in a future state ; for even Sarah too, who was the weaker vessel, and on that account the more liable to despondency ; even she, and Isaac also, and Jacob likewise, with their respective families, all found something in the promise, which not only supported them while they led a similar life, but which even rai- sed their minds above the desire of earthly possessions. Accordingly we read of one and all of them, Heb. xi. 13, — 16. " These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth. For they that say such things, declare plainly that they seek a country. And truly if they had been mindful of that country whence they came, they might have had opportunity to have returned ; but now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly : wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he hath prcr pared for them a city," Oh ! after this, should w€ not expect to hear all the carnalizers of this glorious covenant rather humbly confessing their ignorance, their folly, and their guilt, •than still attempting to overturn a matter which is so clearly established upon the basis of inviolable truth. As the q-ueen \ of Sheba shall rise up in the judgment with that untoward generation which lived in the day* of our blessed Saviour, and shall condemn it, by her anore teachable disposition under circumstances vastly disproportionate ; so, let such beware, lest the spiritu** * Acts vii. 5. f Gen. x.xiii. % Matt. xii. 42. ON THE FOREGOING SECTIONS. ^^ •3.nd her.venly conversation of these servants of the Lord, and that under a dispensation which they deno- minate a carnal one, do not condemn them for their car- iial and ungodly walk, even under a dispensation which^ according to their own account, is a dispensation of spi- rit and of light. 6. This leads us to make one remark more, which respects the /aiy, and the Jewish ritual, which were af- , terwards subjoined to the promise. The apostle assures us, that the one does not oppose the other ; though, to set them in direct opposition, the one to the other, is the common way in which the subject is treated. The one is represented as the ministration of death and condem- nation, shewing no compassion to the guilty ; but, like the merciless man mentioned in the parable, taking his debtor by the throat, and saying, Pay me what thou ow- est *. But the other is represented as a dispensation of mercy, tender mercy, unmerited and unsolicited, ema- nating from the throne of God, flowing from his gene- rous heart, as an expression of his mere good will and pleasure to his miserable creatures, and extending itself even to the most guilty artd hell-deserving of the chil- dren of men. Thus death is said to come by the one, and life by the other. And what can be more opposite to each other than life and death, condemnation and pardon, a free and full forgiveness, or condign punish- xnent, without the smallest admixture of mercy ? Now that there is a law revealed in the Scriptures, with properties and sanctions such as have been descri- bed, I should suppose that no one, who has read them with disceniment and the fear of God, can entertain a doubt. But thai this was the law, in this sense of the word, given by Moses to the children of Israel, and as comprising alV the statutes and ordinances which he en- * Matt, xviii. 2£. C* GENERAL OBSERVATIONS joined, nothing, I suspect, can be more contrary to the truth. The law, in the sense in which Moses was its legislator, was peculiar to the Jewish people, and was abrogated and done away by the coming of Christ. But the law, in the sense in which it condemns men as trans- gressors in the sight of God, unlike to the other in point of restriction^ it extends to all mankind^ Gentiles as well as Jews ; and in point of duration^ being of a moral nature, its obligations are eternal. It is not true of the Mosaic law, that there were no intimations of mercy made known in it ; for to what purpose were the sacrifices, and all that train of rites and ceremonies under that dispensation, but just sym- bolical representations of such designs ? In what other light can they be considered, than the gospel adapted to the then particular state of the church, and as convey- ing the same great and leading truths, only in a diffe- rent way ? All had their use in pointing to Christ, and to serve till lie came. But as they were not the sub- stance, but shadows only, it was necessary that the lat- ter should be rcrnoved to give place to the former. Hence the apostle says, Gal.iii. 21. "If there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law." Suppose him here to be speaking of the law of Mo- ses, in the sense in which we have taken it, as I do think he is, his assertion does by no means contradict w^-iat we have said respecting it. A righteousness as full and as free as that made known by the gospel, was indeed pointed out by the law, in this sense ; but there was nothing in that dispensation which coxAd procure it. The sacrifices, and all the other rites, pointed to some- thing which was to be done in the dispensation which was to succeed, but which they were unable to effect of themselves ; and therefore it was with the grer.test ON THE FOREGOING SECTIONS. 65 -propriety that the apostle should say of the law, even in this sense, that it did not give life. The work, which Christ was to finish on the cross, was that which they in that dispensation were to look Jhrward to for lifcy as w^ in this, are to take a retrospective view of the same object, for the same purpose. We therefore see that the religion taught in the Scrip- tures is one ; one way of death, and one way of life, made known throughout the whole, vfj- bi/ one man sin entered into the ivorldy and death by sin ; so death passes through to all his descendents, as sinners likewise. And as in Adam all die, so in Christ alone shall all be made alive *. The first clause of this last passage contain •-; an assumed truth which the apostle considers incontro- vertible, namely, that all men have sinned, and are con- sequently liable to death through the frsi man. And from this assumed fact, he infers that life could only be by the second. Now, without supposing the last clause to countenance in the smallest the idea of universal re- demption, as has been asserted, it contains an absolute fact, supported by the whole of revelation, that there is life for the guilty in Christ, but in none other ; so that if men who *' are dead in trespasses and sinsf" are made alive at all, it is, as the apostle declares, in Christ Je- sus. Nor was this any novel doctrine started by the apostle ; for '' to him bear all the prophets witness." Abraham saw his day afar off, and was glad. Yea, long before Abraham, he was known as the seed of the woman, which should bruise the head of the serpent. And he shall be known, for his name is worthy of ever- lasting remembrance. — He shall be known as the Savi- our and the Great One, elevated on his cross, like the brazen serpent in the wilderness, crying, *' Look unto ♦ Rom. V. U, I Cor. w. 22. f Eph. ii. 1. 66 GENERAL OBSERVATIONS me all ye ends of the earth," look unto me, " and be ye saved ; for I am God, and there is none else." To obtain clear and distinct perceptions of the law in this two-fold sense then, is an object of the greatest im- portance that can be imagined. As the Scriptures assure us that the one was abrogated, and as the other from its very nature never could, but still is, and ever will be binding on moral agents, and as by the one comes death, and by the other life, either of which is to be the everlasting portion of every child of Adam ; so there can be no subject more noble in itself, or more deeply claiming our attention from personal interest. The principles of morality are exceedingly brief and clear, and such as can be easily understood by all men, though to our shame it must be said, we are continual- ly chargeable with violations thereof. Love, love to God which knows no limits, and love to our neighbour in the same manner, and perhaps to the same degree as we love ourselves, is the sum and substance of the whole *. Wherever therefore this principle occurs * The degree of love the children of men are to exercise to one another, seems to be pointed out by Solomon, in Prov. xxiv. 11. As self-preservation is a most natural principle, so we are there taught not to hold the life or welfare of our neighbour less sacred than our own. Natural self-love, therefore, and the love of o^r neighbour, are principles, which, though distinct in themselves, do not however, when properly understood, run counter to each other. The first indeed seems to require no argument to induce men to an observance of it, but as an assumed truth it may be well employed as the strongest of all arguments to induce to an observance of the second. Both our Lord himself, and his servant Paul, evidently make use of it in this light. Luke vi. 31. Eph. V. 28,29. We meej; with a circumstahce in that very interest- Mig Narrative of the Hon. John Byron, which seems clearly tp demonstrate how natural it is for the human mind to act in behalf ©f its neighbour, when it acts promptly, and without affording it- s«lf time to indulge in insidious reflections. The circumstance is ON THE FOREGOING SECTIONS. 67 throughout the whole word of God, whether in the law of Moses or in the prophets, in the Gospels or Epistles, that is the moral law,'the law which can never be chan- ged, the law of which it is said, " Though heaven and earth should pass away, yet one jot or tittle of this can- not fail." And here it may be observed, that even the gospel itself contains something of a moral principle in it, and binds to the duties of love both to God and our neigh- bour, by motives the most powerful which can be con- ceived. Love to God and our neighbour is enforced by the consideration not of his authority merely, but of. his love to us. And this is again enhanced by the con- sideration that it is manifested, not only to creatures before whom he makes all his goodness to pass, but as sinners whom he purposes to redeem by the precious blood of his own dear Son. It is this moral principle in the gospel which gives it such hold upon men. They are not at liberty to treat it with scorn or contempt, without at the same time heightening their condemna- tion. It differs from the law denominated moral^ in that it declares a full and free pardon to all who believe it, though previously lying under the curse of the other. And because this matchless grace revealed in it, is not only unmerited on the part of the sinner, but procured at a price of such infinite value, and consequently de~ tbis : — The Indians among whom he was, were, on account of some superstition, going to throw him over board the canoe, for casting his limpet shells into the sea. But' having landed shortly thereafter, as he was going to eat a large bunch of berries he had gathered, from a tree, ' One of the Indians,' says he, ' snatched ' them out of my hand, and threw them away, making me to un- * derstand that they were poisonous. Thus,' continues he, * in all * probability, did these people now save my life, who a few hours ' before were going to take it from me, for throwing away a shell,' paff.123. 68 GENERAL OBSERVATIONS monstrating the love of God, in a manner wliich never had been done before, the despising of this therefore,. seals^ in a way which the violation of the moral law was incapable of doing, the eternal condemnation of such deluded mortals. Hence the words of Jesus, *' This is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than the light,, because their deeds are evil," Johniii. 19. And hence those of Paul, *' If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema Marantha," that is to say, accursed ivJien the Lord comesy 1 Cor. xvi. 22. As then the ptlblication of the gospel, or the glad tidings of pardon to guilty men, has been the principal object God has had in vieWy from the first to the last of the revelations he has given them ; and as the gospel was not only made known in this dispensation which was latterly established by Christ and his apostles, but in the first promise, in the covenant with Abraham, and in the Mosaic ritual and ordinances ; it must therefore be exceedingly improper to talk, as many do, of an indis- criminate abrogation of all that went before this dis- pensation established by the Son of God in person- In the very nature of the thing it could not be ; for what is binding in this^ as it flows from moral princi- ples, was likewise binding in the former ; and though heaven and earth may change, there can be no altera- tion respecting this, while His authority who enjoined it endures, and while subjects endure, who must be rur. led and regulated by the laws of the Most High. Ought we not then to reverence his authority more, than, in order to support our particular systems, to discard any part of those obligations which still stand in force ? 7. But as we intend to enter more fully into this subject in another part of our work, we shall say no- thing further on it here, but shall conclude by a reflec- OK" THE FOREGOING SECTIONS. C9 tlon or two upon the grace and faithfulness of God, in first freely giving, and then fuililling his promises to men. Oh, then, what marvellous grace is this, Avhen we had rendered ourselves obnoxious to divine wrath, and were literally in the situation of the rebel angels, to whom no mercy was shewn, to have the glad tidings of pardoning mercy sounded in our ears ! If the thing be great in itself, and if the manner of effecting it can en- hance its value, surely the grace of God, which has thus appeared unto men, bringing salvation, has heights and depths, breadths and lengths, which are absolutely- unfathomable to a finite mind. It never can be in time, for it will take eternity itself to investigate, appreciate, and celebrate the glories of such unutterable grace. Till that bright morning arise however. Oh to be but increasingly sensible of its value, that we may become increasingly liker him from whom it flows, as from sn inexhaustible fountain ! And, again, let the faithfulness of God to all the gi a- cious prom.ises he hath given, convince us of our un- faithfulness ; and let it, like a two-edged sword cutting both ways, humble us on the one hand, and stimu- late us on the other, to be imitators of God as dear children. What reason have we to rejoice that the Lord's ways are not as our ways, nor his thoughts like our thoughts ! Like Israel of old, we are ever ready to say, " All that the Lord hath commanded will we do, and be obedient," while our consciences can too of- ten testify to our face the hypocrisy of our lips. But the words which have gone out of His mouth, cannot return to him void. They are not yea and nay, but have one uniform language, in which, blessed be his name ! the good of his creatures seems to be as much consulted as his own glory. The praises of his faith-' ^0 GENERAL OBSERVATIONS, &C. fulness then, uttered by Zacharias under the direction of God's unerring Spirit, when his mouth was opened, and his tongue loosed, are the most appropriate that can be here used. '' Blessed be the Lord God of Israel ; for he hath visited and redeemed his people, and hath raised up an horn of salvation for vis in the house of his Servant David ; as he spake bj the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began ; that we should be saved from our enemies, and from the hand of all that hate us, to perform the mei-cy promi- sed to our fathers, and to remember his holy covenant ; the oath which he sware to our father Abraham, that he would grant unto us, that we, being delivered out of the hand of our enemies, might serve him without fear, in holiness and righteousness before him, all the days of our life." The redeemed of all ages and nations, then, collected from the four quarters of the earth, from the first down to the last straggling sinner who shall be brought int9 the family of God, will be so many monuments of his faithfulness and grace, which shall endure not only to millions of ages hence, but to eternity itself. What an honour and what a privilege will it then be, to be made pillars in the temple of our God, to go no more out, but to be eternal monuments, bearing inscriptions of that grace made known to the children of men since the world began ! If ambition for earthly glory so in- spire the human breast, as to excite men to engage in pursuits the most perilous in order to obtain it — assu- redly there is not an object in the whole extent of crea- tion worthy of a name or a place in their affections in comparison with this. CHAPTER II. eF THE PERSONS INCLUDED IN THE COVENANT, CALLED THE SEED OF ABRAHAM. SECTION I. Shelving that the seed of Abraham is of two kinds ^ namely y carnal and spiritual. JLN entering on a subject such as the present, it nnay be proper to ©bserve, that the existence of a seed to Abra- ham at all, was a work entirely of a supernatural kind. Early intimations had indeed been given that he should see his seed, and that his seed should be exceedingly nu- merous, even as the stars of the heavens, the dust of the earth, or the sand upon the sea shore. But between the uttering of this promise and its accomplishment, even in its first stage, there was not only a long period allowed to intervene, but matters were permitted to take such a turn, as to render its accomplishment, to all human appearance, impossible. The old stocks were both per- mitted to die of age, ere the tender scion which was to propagate and perpetuate their kind sprung forth. But God, " who redeemeth the souls of his people from de- struction, can also rene-w their youth like the eagles *," * Psal.ciii, 4, 5. 72 THE SEED or ABRAHAM, when he hath any important end to be answered by it. Hence it is said of Abraham, Bom. iv. 19, — 21. *' That he, being not weak in faith, (though in body), considered not his own body now dead, when he was about an hundred years old, neither yet the deadness of Sarah's womb. He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief, but was strong in faith, giving glory to God, being fully persuaded that what he had promised he was able also to perform." And again; Heb. xi. 11, 12. '^ Through faith also Sarah herself received strength to conceive seed, and was delivered of a child when she was past age, because she judged him faithful who had promised. Therefore sprang there even of one," of Abraham to-wit, " and him as good as dead, so many as the stars of the sky in multitude, and as the sand which is by the sea-shore innumerable." In our illustrations of the covenant with Abraham, we have seen that this innumerable progeny, both in ^ point of promise and accomplishment, constitutes one of its most important parts. We observed, that he was not only to have a seed, of which he was to be the fa- ther in the strict and literal sense of the word, but that he was constituted or appointed to be also the father o£ believers of all nations, from the beginning to the end of the world. ' This distinction of Abraham's seed into two kinds,' as Dr Macknight observes, ' is intimated by our Lord ' himself, John viii. 39. where he told the Jews who ' sought to kill him, that notwithstanding they were the ' natural offspring of Abraham, they were not his chil- ' dren^ unless they did the works of Abraham. The ' same distinction is taught still more plainly by the ' apostle Paul, whp calls Abraham's natural progeny, < his seed by the law, the law of marriage ; but his seed '■^ by the appointment of God, who gave believers of all CARNAL AND SPIRITUAL. 73 * nations to him for seed, that 'which is by the faith of » Abraham. *' That the promise might be sure to all * the seed, not to that only which is by the law, but to * that also which is by the faith of Abraham, who is the * father of us all," Rom. iv. 16. In like manner, the * same apostle by telling us, Rom. ix. 8. '* The children * of the flesh, these are not the children of God, but the ' children of the promise are counted for the seed," hath * insinuated that Abraham had two kinds of children or ' seed, and that the seed by the promise, (a father of * many nations I have constituted thee), Gen. xvii. 5. * are the children of God, to whom alone the promises * in the covenant, in their second and highest meaaings, ' belong.' To these passages we may add that noted one of John the Baptist, which he addressed to the Pharisees and Sadducees who came to his baptism. *' O generation of vipers ! who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come ? Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repen- tance, and begin not to say within yourselves, we have Abraham to our father, for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children to Abraham,'* Mat. iii. 7, — 9. and Luke iii. 7, 8. The same distinc- tion is in like manner manifest^ Rom.iv. 12. "And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only^ but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had being yet uncircumcised." Agreeably to this distinction between a spiritual and carnal progeny belonging to Abraham, does the whole scheme of salvation proceed. As the apostle declares that it is not the children of the fesh who are the chil- dren of God, so to constitute this relation in the spii'it- ual sense, something more is necessary than mere na- tural descent. It was the pride, and I may add, the K 74: THE SEED OF ABRAHARf, ruin of tKe Jews^ to plume themselves on their descent from Abraham the friend of God ; but the gospel, as a system which stains thp pride of human glory, leaves no room for any to glory on such accounts. The doctrine of human depravity, and of regeneration or the new birtl^, are doctrines as clearly taught, 1 will be bold to ^ssert, as atiy contained in the Scriptures of truth. Ac- cordingly, even upon the seed of Abraham according to the flesh, were these doctrines inculcated, and sl\own to be of indispensable obligation to them, as much as to the Gentiles. Whatever privileges therefore the form:- er might enjoy above the latter, in having " the * oracl&s of God committed to them, and in being Israelites, to whom pertained the adoption, and the glory, and the Covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises ; yea, of whom as concerning the flesh, Christ came, who is God over all, and blessed for ever :"-Tf.they were still both on a level as to their state before God. If the one were sinners, dead in trespasses and sins f , and needed the regenerating in- fluences of the Spirit of the living God, the other also, when tried by their own Scriptures J, were no less found to be all under sin, that every mouth might be stopped, and the w-hole world become guilty before God, to the intent that there might be one way of salvation, and but one only, for all men. • It remains now to be inquired into, that, since the natural deseendents of Abraham were, in a manner, re- cognized by God as his people, as well as himself, upoa what principle they were so, and to wbiit extent the re- lation between God and them actually proceeded. And here I would remark, that it is exceedingly dangerous to take up things merely b/ their sound, and from such slight analogy, to affix specific and determined meanings * Rom.iii.2. ix'. 4,5. tEph.ii. 1. t Rom. iii. CARNAL AND SPIRITUAL. f !j to them, which, perhaps, they may not Be able to bear upon a closer investigation. I grant, indeed, that God is said to be the God of Abraham, and of his seed after him; but when you take this as referring to his descendents in the literal sense, is it necessary to affix a spiritual signification to this relation, and to suppose it impossible for God to be a God to any, in any other sense ? We find that Nebu- chadnezzar is styled his servant, and Cyrus his anointed, apparently for no other reason, than that he selected and employed them as instruments in his hand for ac- complishing a particular work *. Again, as he (treated, upholds, and governs all things, he is hence called *' the God of the whole earth ;" and the psalmist, speaking of this very subject, calls all the creatures his ser- vants f. We have seen that there was one very important ^ reason for which the Lord selected, the seed of Abra^ ham, which was, that the Messiah might come of his loins %, And might not this be also a reason for his styling himself their God in the common and genera! sense, without implying actually the spiritual relation ? But ^s I am aware, that this is the grand point upon which Pedo-baptists rest the whole of their reasoning, I doubt not but thisy will be exceedingly averse to admit it. We hear the questions daily reiterated. Do you suppose that God would call himself the God of any one that he did not consider as his ? or yet recognize as his peo- ple any who were not so in reality ? To which we an- swer. No, most certainly ; we dp not suppose either the one or the other. When he styled Nebuchadnezzar his servant, the one was, even speaking most strictly, the master, and the other the servant in that particular business in which he was employed. And the same * Jer. XXV. 9. Isa. xlv. 1. f Psal, cxix. 91. \ Heb. li. IC. 76 THE SEED or ABRAHAM, may be said of Cyrus, and so of the rest. And as for tlie natural descendents of Abraham, it was certainly a very important matter that they should be selected as the Progenitors of the Lord's Anointed^ and well meriting all the appellations which were given them. Whether there- fore they be called God's peculiar People, Treasure, Inheritance, or His People simply ; and he their God, . Redeemer, Portion, and so on ; the honour he conferred upon them, and the deliverances he wrought in their behalf, fully justify all such expressions. Besides, we do not deny that God had a people, a true, spiritual, and believing people or seed among the Jews in all ages, and even in the darkest times ; and that he was the God of such, in the true spiritual sense of the word, none will deny. But the question between us and the Pedo-baptists is, whether those passages wherein the re- lation between God, as the God of Israel, and the peo- ple of Israel, as his people, is stated, was indeed a spi- ritual relation, and nothing else ; or whether, besides this spiritual relation which necessarily subsisted be- tween God. and his spiritual subjects, there was also a relation which subsisted between them as a nation, which as necessarily behoved to be of a different kind. As I freely profess myself to be of the latter opi- nion, and as I know that Pedo-baptists, in general, are of the former ; I would briefly state, in addition to what I have said, some further reasons for my opinion, hop- ing at the same time, that if they do not convince them, they will in due time favour us with theirs. One reason, therefore, is, that it does not seem to be the way of God, nor even to accord with the scheme of salvation revealed in his word, to recognize whole nations as his, in a spiritual sense. Upon this principle, what should we make any nation at any period to which his gospel has yet come ? Take for example that very ns- CARNAL AND SPIRITUAL. t7 tion in which our lot has been cast, and suppose, that because God, and to his name be the praise, has many spiritual and sincere worshippers in it,, that therefore the whole is to be regarded as his in the same spiritual sense. Would this be any thing like the fact, when iniquity runs down our streets like a mighty torrent, and vchen there is so much cause for sighing and cry- ing for the abominations that are done in the midst of us? But whether or not we, even regarded as a nation, are worse than the nation of the Jews, almost at any period, let any one read the whole history of that peo-- pie, and say if he can. But another reason why nations cannot be con- sidered as spiritual in their national capacity, is, that it does not seem to accord with the scheme of salvation revealed in the Scriptures. Conversion to God is there held out as being absolutely necessary to constitute a person his spiritual subject. But upon this principle, so far as it regarded the home-born Jews, the mere cir- cumstances of natural birth, and circumcision on the eighth day, are evidently substituted in the room of conversion. And as for others, whether they were voluntary sojourners among them, or slaves bought with their money, or captives taken in war, the cere- monial of circumcision alone is rendered equally effica- cious. Nothing more, to give them a place in Israel, seems to have been required of them. But this ordinance, it will be said, had a spiritual meaning in it ; and beyond a doubt, whenever it was dispensed, its spiritual meaning would be explained in order that it might be preserved from generation to ge- neration. Our views of this ordinance we have given elsewhere, nor have we any scruple in admitting that its administration would always be accompanied witli suitable iustruclions, whenever the administrators them- VS THE SEED OF ABRAHAM, selves happened to be suitable persons. But if at any time, it had perchance fallen into the hands of such as the sons of Eli — alas ! it was but sorry instruction that couid have been expected'. It is not, howevet, with the sense of the ordinance that we have here so much to do, as with the subjects of it ; th? former, as we have just hinted, having beeii considered already, we shall say a word or two respect^ ing the latter in this place. When we attend to its original institution as it respects the subjects, we find that it runs thus, '^ And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man-child in your generations ; he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger which is not of thy seed. He that is born in thy hous6, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised." Now, after these words, can any who has not a par- ticular ftystem of his own to support, still either tena- ciously or dogmatically assert, that the spirituality, even of the subjects, is the only thing which exclusively en- titled any to this ordinance ? Waving this however for argument's sake, as a^iecessary requisite in the cas^ of infants of eight days old, and suppose that in their case^ the faith of the parent was all that was required ; yet still, upon this hypothesis, what would you makp in the case of those bought with their money from any stran- ger, to whom circumcision was to be administered, as well as to the other ? I know it will be said, that they never could be admitted to that, or any other ordinance, without a profession of their faith in the God of Abra- ham -, and that, as the Israelites were commanded to extirpate idolatry from among them, they never cou/d receive any, either as strangers or sojourners, nor yet as slaves, who did not acknowledge the one only living and true God. But even granting this to have been the CARNAL AKD SPIRITUAL. *t9 case, a thing tvbich is not said however ia tlie origins^ institution of the ordinance, what kind of spiritual sub-* jects was it likely to create ? When a master intended to hire, or vz.Xhtv purcJiase servants, which was the pre- wailing custom in those days, it behoved to be made a stipulation in the bargain, that slaves thus transferred from one to another, should not be averse to such ac- knowledgments. And even supposing that in every case, such acknowledgments were obtained, still we ask, was this all that was sufficient to constitute themt spiritual ? or will it be supposed that, in such cases, circumcision was not administered immediately, but that time was granted that they might be instructed in 4ue order, so that tlieir profession might not be a mat- ter of necessity, but of choice ? Bat upon this hypo- thesis, baseless as it is in the word of God, what if some never did repent, or profess faith in the God of Israel ? In that case, they would of course still be un- circumcised, and this very circumstance would have been considered by Jehovah as a breach of his cove- nant. See Gen. xvii. l*. But why allow such unfounded conjectures ever to enter our minds ? Beyond a doubt, if we attend to this subject simply as it stands in the word of God, without prejudice, and without particular systems of our own to support, we shall have very different views respect- ing it from those we have supposed. Supposition in- deed will not need to have a place ; and facts will be so abundant^ that we need not mistake. Without think- ing more lightly either of the ordinance of circumci- sion itself, or of the subjects to whorh it was admini- stered, than Pedo-baptlsts do, or at least ought to do, I confess that to me it appears, in some respects, to weaf an aspect the very opposite of what they main- tain,. It seems to be a darling theme with them, to re- 80 THE SEED OF ABRAHAM, present circumcision as the seal of God's covenant, by which thej intend the covenant of grace ; and to insi- nuate, that all to whom it was administered were in this covenant, at least by profession, till such time as by their ungodly walk they gave evidence to the con- trary. Then they represent such as being cut off from the church of the living God ; and the cases of Ish- snael, and Esau, and the unbelieving Isra:elites in the wilderness, are generally referred to. Now against these various representations, I have se- veral very weighty objections. I have none indeed against the idea of the covenant being the covenant of grace, provided you understand by this expression, in a general manner, the scheme of the salvation of guilty men j but if it be taken in a restricted sense, as imply- ing no more than what usually goes under this name, I cannot acquiesce in it. Nor is this without reason. For the covenant of grace, in this restricted sense, always implies, and indeed is limited to the secret purposes of God, styled his gifts and callings, which are without repentance, and which secure beyond a doubt the eter- nal salvation of all its subjects*. I object, in like manner, to that assertion, that aJ/ to Kuhom circumcision nvas admitiistsred, luere in the covenant^ if by the eoveViant you understand the promise which nvas given to Abraham respecting his seed^ and which was li- mited to one solitary individual in his family. Ere cir- cumcision was at all appointed, we read that Abraham had no fewer than three hundred and eighteen trained servants able to go to war, and probably by the time that that ordinance was instituted, he might have a great many more ; yet, though all these had the ordi- nance of circumcision administered to them, not one of them was in the covenant in this sense. Yea, even Ish- * See more to this purpose, Ch. I. Sect. 1. CARNAL AND SPIRITUAL. S4 mael, his own son, and his sons by Keturah, and his grand-son Esau, though all spiung from the loins of Abraham, were equally utter strangers to it. This leads us of course to a thiird objection, which militates against the idea of cutting off persons included in this covenant or promise, for their improper con- duct. . Not that I am going to deny that God actually threatened to punish, and often did punish them for their 'offences ; but my intention is, to correct the un- founded assertion, in the case of Ishmael and Esau at least, that their ivichedness excluded them. We read of the former, that he mocked at the weaning of Isaac, and the thing being offensive in the sight of Sarah, she requested Abraham to cast him and his mother out of his family ; adding as a reason, for the soti of this botid- •woman shall not be heir ivith my son^ even ivith Isaac. To which I would reply, * No, indeed, Sarah, you say ' rightly, the son of the bond-woman shall not be heir ' with thy son ; for it was respecting thy son, and him ' alone, that the promise was made. The son of the ' bond- woman had neither right nor title to the promise ; ' and tlierefore thou doest him no injury when tliou se- ' curest it to its rightful heir.' Such we conceive to be the true meaning of the ac- count concerning Ishmael. And really had* it been for his wickedness before God that he was cast out, I do not see how we can account for God's tender dealings manifested towards him' and his mother, throughout the whole of this event, withoi^j^ther calls on the part of God, or evidence of repentmc.e, on theirs. See Gen. xxi. As for Esau, the ne?ct person generally brought in on this subject, what can be inore express than these words of an .inspired apostle-^" The children not being yet born, neither having done good or evil, that the purpose T, 82 THE SEED OF ABRAHAM, of God according to election might stand, he saith, Ja- cob have I loved, but Esau have I hated *." What is particularly noticeable in this passage is, an election and reprobation, a love and hatred, fltjwing from the mere good pleasure of the agent, without any consider- ation of moral good or evil in the objects. The best commentators are agreed, as indeed it is evident from the passage, that it was not an election or reprobation to eternal life or condemnation, w^hich is here referred to in the case of these two brothers ; but that it was the birth-right, or the right of primogeniture, the re- striction of the promise in which of their lines the Messiah was to come. This was the election and re- probation, this the love and hatred ; and as this was de- termined in God's own mincj, without any regard to worthinesss or demerit in the objects themselves, yea, even before they existed, it is surprising enough that this event should be so much mistaken, and charged upon the profanity of Esau. Here should have followed also the rejection of the sons of Abraham by Keturah ; for it is an absolute truth that they were likewise separated, and sent aivaif. from his son Is aac ^ luhile Abraham yet lived j-. But as there are no charges of an immoral nature brought against them, I suspect this to be the reason why Pedo- baptists have not availed themselves of this occur-, xence. The case of the unbelieving Israelites in the wilder- ness, is therefore the nejW^'circumstance which is had recourse to. And respecting this, we would remark, that it is not true that they were dealt with as offending members, in a church capacity ; but as their sin impli- ed in it a contempt or disregard of the promised land,. so they were punished in kind, as one should say, by * Rom.ix.ll.J3. f Gen. XXV. 6. CARNAL AND SPIRITUAL. S3 tlie declaration, that none of those who were particular- ly chargeable with this offence should ever see it. This \ve conceive to be the plain statement qf the matter ; and more we do not suppose it possible, without violence, to make it speak. Totally unlike to the Scripture dis- cipline of a church, there was no room left for repen- tance. The people afterwards indeed saw their error, wished then to be obedient, and the threatening to be reversed, and therefore proposed to go up, and take possession of the land at once. But God had sworn in his wrath, that they should not enter into his rest ; and therefore, not an individual of all the six hundred thou- sand who were brought out of Egypt, save Caleb and Joshua, were permitted to enter therein. Their car- cases, according to the divine denunciation, fell in the wilderness. They were destined to the severest pu- nishments in that barren land. And for the accomplish- ment of this, forty years was the period allotted, that they might be wholly worn out and reduced to no- thing, even in the common course of nature*. But when we read of such characters as those of Moses, Aaron and Miriam, Eliazar and Ithamar, Phinehas, and those who prophesied in the camp ; when we see the Lord, at one time, punishing them for their sins by his fiery-fly- ing serpents, and then again healing them by an insti- tution he was graciously pleased to appoint ; when we behold the symbol of his glorious presence still mani- fested in the camp ; this divine oracle consulted, and re- sponses returned ; sacrifices, ablutions, and other cere- monial rites attended to ; solemn worship, prayer, praise, reading and expounding of the law daily obser- ved ; Moses, and Aaron, and others, though still in the wilderness, dying in the hops of a glorious immortali- ty : when we consider these things, we say, as so many * If the.xcth Psalm was penned by Moses, as is generally sup- posed, how illustrative is it of this circumstance ? 84; THE SEED OF ABRAHAM, incontrovertible facts, how is it possible to reconcile them with the idea that Israel, during all this time, was still in a state of rOfFending members under church dis- cipline, and who of course could not be enjoying the rights and privileges gf the house of God ; yea, nor have any well grounded hopes for an eternal state ? The circumstance of the Lord's depriving the rebel- lious Israelites of their enjoyment of the promised land,' we grant, was a signal instance of his awful displeasure with them, and well calculated, as we are reminded in the New Testament, to make both them and us to fear, lest we should come short of that better rest, which still remaineth for the people of God. But it does^not any where appear to be hinted, that all the thousands who died under this displeasure of the Almighty, died under his eternal displeasure ; though no less seems to be im- plied by the manner in which many treat the sub- ject. The apostle says indeed, that it was on account of their unhel'tef tJiat thei) could twt enter in ; but as MoseSy and Aaron, and others, , equally conspicuous for true godliness, happen to be amongst the number of those chargeable with unbelief, their unbelief must of course be restricted to a particular thing. Moses, we are as- sured, believed in the Lord as his God ; but, on one oc- casion, he did not sanctify tlie Lord before the people, for which offence the Lord sware that he should not enter into his rest. Yet this denunciation, affecting as it was, d^d not imply the everlasting exclusion of Moses from the presence of the Lord, for in every other part of Scripture, he is always spoken of as holding a very distinguished place in the world of glory. I grant, that this must have exceedingly affected Moses,, and* put him much more upon his guard to beware of acting in such a manner as to come short of the eternal rest. But this seems all that was intended, for Moses CARNAL AND SPIRITUAL. SS Still enjoyed the spiritual loving-kindness of the Lord, notwithstanding tliis severe sentence, so far from being ever repealed, that it was actually executed. And what we have said of Moses, may be said of Aaron, and Miriam, and the sons of Aaron, yea, and of every one who was spiritual among them. Though they provoked God by their unbelief, in one instance, so^ as to cause him swear even in his wrath that they should not enter into his rest ; yet we may be assured that by the sanctifying influences of his grace, such an affecting dispensation would be the very means of se- curing them to the eternal rest. It would cause them like Paul,- to keep under the body, and to bring it into subjection, lest after all their pretensions to religion they should be found to be but cast-aways. Their fear of coming short of the eternal rest, must have been awfully excited by their actual privation of the tem- poral ; and in as much as the former was of infinitely more importance than the latter, their attention to act so as to please God must have been proportionally in- creased— This seems to have been the case with the churcli of Corinth. The apostolic rod, which was not 'Csed for their destruction but edification, wrought in them the most marvellous effects. " Behold," says the apo<5tle, " this self-same' thing, what carefulness it wrought in you; yea, what clearing of yourselves ; yea, what indignation at yourselves ; yea, what fear ; yea, what vehement desire ; yea, what zeal ; yea, what revenge !" 2 Cor. vii. 11 *. * O 1 beautiful 1 Awaked from their cainal security by the for- mer epistle and apostolic rod, as by a penl of thunder; like elect- rified persons they are at once roused from their dormant' state ! Formerly they could connive at a vile incestuist, acknowledge him as a brother, yea, even glory in him 1 (I suppose he laust have been rich 1) But now, but now they bhewed themselves to be clear of that matter '. Kow their i?idigHati>jn^ which, had tliey SB THE SEED OF ABRAHAM, From this event we may also learn, that God, deal* ing with his people as rational beings, generally speak- ing, adapts the measure and nature of his blessings, to the measure and nature of their faith. This seems to have been the principle in regard to many of the mira- cles of healing performed by our blessed Lord. " As your faith, so be it unto you," was a very common mode of address on such occasions. From the report circulated of the Lord Jesus, that he was a man mighty in word and deed, speaking as never man spoke, and healing all manner of diseases, thousands, and tens of thousands flocked to him from all quarters of the coun- try. And all who had any sick with divers diseases, and they that were lunatic, or vexed with unclean spirits, or dumb demons, or blindj or halt, or lame, leprous, or palsied, or withered, were brought unto him, in order to be healed by him. And faith in his ability to per- form such cures as they severally stood in need of, was invariably required. But though many believed in Je- sus as the Saviour of the body, as able by his miracul- ous power completely to eradicate from thence the most inveterate diseases, yet this did not imply their invari- able belief in him as the Saviour of the soul. Nay, we are certain that many, notwithstanding they obtain- ed the former, gave the most decided evidence that they were strangers to the latter *. remahied in their former state, would have been directed against the apostle for telling them the truth, they turn all against them- selves. Yea, they even /fa/-, lest God should swear in his wrath, and make the dead corpses which were now among them on ac- count of this matter, to be but emblems of what he would do in the world to come. For which cause, ihtj I'ehemently desire Sihovt all things, to have the sanctified use of such a dispensation. And this again fires them with %eal for God and his cause. And never can they forget the just revenge they ought to take on themselve=, * As ui the case of the ten lepers and others. CARNAL AKD SPIRITUAL. 87 Now, may it not be so likewise in the case we have been considering ? We have seen that it was on account of their unbelief, that they could not enter into the pro- mised land. But as this unbelief did not extend to every principle of their faith, but was restricted to a particular instance ; so, many who might afterwards have faith in this one point, and so obtain by their faith possession of what others by their unbelief lost, might yet be destitute of that faith which was necessary for the obtaining of that inheritance, of which Canaan was but a type. As the former could not enter into the earthly inheritance because of unbelief in that particulai-, so neither could the latter be able to enter into the heavenly inheritance, though they indeed had entered the earthly, unless their faith rose towards the contemplation and belief of high- er objects than they either saw or enjoyed in the land of Canaan. Canaan earthly, was but a type or prefi- guration of Canaan heavenly ; and to rise from the one to the other, it was necessary to have understood and believed it in this sfense. These observations, as I should suppose, having over- turned in a satisfactory manner those positions which called them forth, I v;ould here subjoin a quotation, corroborating all we have said respecting the two-fold seed of Abraham, from that well known, pious, evan- gelical, impartial and masterly writer, Dr John Owen, I| now well recollect of having read the passage in the Doctor's own works several years ago, when I had more leisure than I have at present for general reading on theological subjects ; but it having entirely escaped my memory, till I saw it in Mr M'Lean's answers to Mr Wardlaw, I acknowledge myself a debtor to Mr M'Lean for enabling me to bring it forward on the pre- sent occasion. ♦ Two privileges,' says our author, ' did God grant 88 THE SEED or ABRAHAM, ' unto Abraham, upon his separation to a special inle- ' rest in the old promise and covenant. ' 1st, That, according to the flesh, he should be the ''father of the Messiah, the promised seed, who was the ' very life of the covenant, the fountain and cause of all ' the blessings contained in it. That this privilege was * temporary, the thing itself doth demonstrate. * ^dJy, Together with- this, he had also another pri- ' vilege granted unto him, namely, that his faith, where- • ' by he was personally interested in the covenant, should ' be the pattern of the faith of the church in all geucra- ' tions ; and that none should ever come to be a mem- ' ber of it, or a sharer in its blessings, but by the same ' faith that he had fixed on the seed that was in the ' promise, to be brought forth from him in the world. ' On the account of this privilege, he became the father * of all them that believe ; for they that are of faith, ' the same are the children of Abraham, Gal. iii. 7. ' Rom.iv. 11. and thus he bepame heir of the world, ' ver. 13. in that ail that should believe throughout the * world, being thereby implanted into the covenant ' made with him, should become his spiritual chil- * dren. ' Answerable to this tv.'o-fold end of the separation of ' Abraham, there was a double seed allotted unto him. ' A seed according to the flesh, separated to the bring- ' ing forth of the Messiah according to the flesh ; and * a seed according to the promise^ that is, such as by faith ' should have interest in the promise, or all the elect of ' God. Multitudes afterwards were of the carnal seed ' of Abraham, and of the number of the people sepa- * yated to bring forth the Messiah in the flesh ; and yet ' were not of the seed according to the promise^ lior in- ' terested in the spiritual blessings of the covenant, be= ^ cause they did not personally believe, as our apostle CARNAL AND SPIRITUAI.. 89 ' declares, Heb. iv. And many afterwards, who were * not of the carnal seed of Abraham, nor interested ia ' the privilege of bringing forth the Messiah in the ' flesh, were yet destined to be made his spiritual seed' ' hf faith, that in them he might become fieir of the * world, and all nations of the earth be blessed in him. ,' Now, it is evident that it is the second privilege ' and spiritual seed, wherein the church to whom the ' promises were made is founded, and whereof it doth ' consist, namely, in them who by faith are interested * in the covenant of Abraham, whether they be of the ' natural seed or no. And herein lay the great mistake * of the Jews of old, wherein they are followed by their ^ posterity unto this day. They thought no more was * needful to interest them in the. covenant of Abraham, ' but that they be his seed according to the flesh ; and .* they, constantly pleaded the latter privilege, as the * ground and reason of tfie former. ' It is true, they were the .children of Abraham ac- * cording to the flesh ; but, on that account, they c^a * have no other privilege than Abraham had in the flesh ' himself ; and this was, as we hdve shewed, that he * should be set apart as a special channel, through whose ' loins God would derive the promised seed into the ' world. The former carnal privilege of Abraham ' and his posterity, expired on the grounds before men- * tioned ; having answered its end, the ordinances of ' worship which were suited thereunto, did necessarily ^ cease also ; and this cast the Jews into great perplexi- * ties, and proved the last trial that God made of them. ' For whereas both these, namely, the carnal and spiri- ' tual privileges of Abraham's covenant, had been cai-- •' ried on together in a mixed wa,y for many generations, 90 THE SEED OF ABRAHAM, ' coming now to be separated, and a trial to be madt * who of the Jews had interest in both, who in one on- ' Ij ; those who had only the carnal privilege of being ' children of Abraham according to the flesh, contend- * ed for a share, on that single account, in the other ' also, that is, in all the promises annexed to the cove- ' nant. But the foundation of their plea was taken ' away, and the church unto which the promises be- ' long, remained with them that were heirs of Abra- * ham's faith only. The church unto whom all the * spiritual promises belong, are only those who are heirs ' of Abraham's faith, believing as he did, and thereby * interested in his covenant.' Such were the sentiments of the venerable Owen, re- specting the Abrahamic covenant. It is true, he was a Pedo-baptist in principle ; but he is here writing with- out any view to that much controverted subject. And it so happens, that, in the course of the illustration of the subject he had in hand, he lays down principles which are certainly right and incontrovertible in them- selves, and which to me appear utterly incompatible with the tenets which even /te /limseif must have held as a Pedo-baptist. How then, it will perhaps be asked, how did it happen, that such a man as Dr Owen could be so inconsistent with himself? How could 'a man of his discernment and integrity act so far be- side himself, as to maintain principles which did not only differ, but which were positively opposite to and destructive of each other ? To whi,ch I would re- ply, that Dr Owen, with all his learning and ability, was yet but a man ,- and being ovl^ a man, he was therefore fallible, and perhaps he never brought the two ends of his system together. It is well known too, that he was a very scholastic divine, and human sys^ CARNAL AND SPIRITUAL. 91 tems) even In his writings, are not altogether out of the •question. And moreover, though he thought for him- self on many subjects, I dare say, as much as any man either before or since, yet this was not the case uni- versally. Might not popular preconceived notions therefore, partial investigations of truth,iand the omis- sion of weighing all the materials collected in an even balance, to see whether or not they would tally, account for the whole charge which can be brought against this great and good man ? But in this I speak solely for myself, without wish- ing to urge my opinions as a standard for my bre- thren. All that I ask, is liberty to think for myself, and to express myself according to my own conviction ; a freedom, I am sure, I withhold from none. I must therefore say, that there is something so simple, and so satisfactory in the representation here given of the Abra- hamic covenant, by Dr Owen, as really to cause me to look with a suspicious eye upon any system that would lay its votaries under a constraint to controvert it. Yea, I would go further, and plainly confess, that if I cannot hold Pedo-baptism and this vieiv of the covenant consis- tently at the same time, there would appear a greater inconsistency in my view, yea, and a greater loss which would not be compensated, to give up the latter for the former, than the former for the latter. Yea, it is not merely comparative loss or gain^ but absolute right or lurongf that would be here at stake. If the doctrint- concerning the two seeds of Abraham here stated so clearly both by Drs Macknight and Owen from the Scriptures of truth, must be given up^ in order to main- tain i1^f ant-baptism^ I must confess, for my part, that it would be giving up what I see to be the revealed will of God ; and therefore, instead of taking so unwarrant- 92 THE LITERAL SEED able and dangerous a step, I would abandon the other as a crazy fabric of man's own erection ; for it is ira- j possible that his blessed word can contradict itself. We might mention several other Pedo-baptist writers as concurring with our views on this subject, when bap*- tism is out of the question j but without taking up our time unnecessarily with references of this kind, we shall rather go on to make a few remarks, j^rj-/, upon the two seeds in the Abrahamic covenant, and then^ in a more general way, upon the whole. Remarks upon the lite- ral seed of Abraham, will be the subject of our next section. SECTION II. Of the LITERAL Seed of Abraham, XN speaking of this subject, I would remark in the first place, that all the natural descendents of Abraham were not included in the covenant which God made with him. None but Isaac^ as we have already remark- ed, in the family of Abraham, and, none but Jacob in the family of Isaac, were included in the covenant, or, which is the same thing, were children of the promise. Though Abraham was himself a believer, this could not alter the purposes of Jehovah, or endow Abraham with ?. OF ABRAHAM. 93 power to convey that right to any but to those for whom it was prepared. All his other descendents, yea, and the whole of his numerous household, were indeed cir- cumcised. But this seems not to have been on the ' ground that they were in the covenant, or heirs of tl^ic ■ promise, either spiritual or carnal, but because they were of /lis family ; for it had been enjoined as a posi- tive institution that every male in his house, seemingly independent of any other consideration, whether of his seed, or whether they were' bond servants, or strangers sojourning among them, should be circumcised. Thus circumcision would mark out, as a sort of distinguish- ing characteristic, all who belonged to the family of Abraham. Nor was this, though apparently the literal and primary idea of the ordinance, at all inconsistent with its. spiritual significations, any more than the spiri- tual use the apostle makes of the games among the an- cient Greeks and Romans, when applied to divine sub- jects. The natural descendents of Abraham, strictly speak- ing, comprise several people and nations. It was pre- dicted that twelve princes should descend from Ishmael, and that, though his hand should be against every man, and every man's hand against him, yet he should dwell in the presence of all his brethren. This has accord- ingly come to pass ; and the peculiar manners of the Hagarefies, NabathaanSy Itureans^ Arabsy Scenites^ and SaracetUy though undesigned by themselves, bear the most evident tokens of being the descendents of this an- cient patriarch, and of course afford no slender evidence to the truth of our holy religion *. * See this subject treated at large by Bishop Newton on the Prophecies, Vok I, 04 triE LITERAL SEED What became of his descendents by Keturah, whethef they remained a people distinct by themselves, or were* incorporated with other nations, I am not prepared to say * ; but if they were as prolific as the other bran- ches of his family have proved, how astonishing be- yond conception has that part of the promise been ac- complished, that his seed should be as the dust of the earth I But it is with the descendents of Abrjlham in the line of Isaac and of Jacob that we have chiefly here to do. They only w^ere the children of the promise in the strict sense of the word. And though there was a di- vision in the family of the one, no such thing happened in the family of the other. Esau was separated from Jacob because he was not a child of the promise, and erected a kingdom by himself. But Jacob had no less than twelve sons^ none of whom were excluded, but honoured to be the twelve heads, as we have observed, of the twelve tribes or families of Israel. It is the his- tory of this people we are going to consider, and in do- ing so, we would^rj/ advert to the design of their se- lection, first, from the vest of the nations at large, and then from their brethren of the same family : I mean from Ishmael and Esau. We have already remarked, that this peculiarity of separation first began in the calling of Abraham away from his kindred and his father's house. The people of the Chaldees, or Assyrians, among whom Abraham dwelt, were idolaters by profession. But to this, Abra- ham's father's family seems to have been an exception. Nahor, who was either grand-father or brother to Abra« * Compare Gen. xxv. 1, 2, 3. with 1 Chron. i. 32, 33. OF ABRAHAM. 95. ham, for there were two of that name *, was evidently a worshipper of the true God, for the God of Abraham, subsequent to the period of his calling, is also styled the God of Nahor. Abraham thus called, might have returned whence he came if he had chosen, for there was opportunity af- forded him t ; but knowing too well the designs for which he had been called, he durst not avail himself of such a circumstance, without both offending and defeat- ing the purposes of Jehovah. He remained therefore a stranger in a strange land. And the Loi'd blessed him, and gave him a posterity, the destination of whom he was careful to secure before his death. Ishmael, and his sons by Keturah he sent away luhlle he yet lived X: but all his goods and his riches, both in men-servants and maid-servants, in silver, and gold, and cattle, were com- mitted to Isaac as their rightful heir ; so that he was not only an heir of promises yet far distant, but the im- mediate possessor of the whole of his father's substance. Of him Esau and Jacob sprung. But as it has been observed, the purpose of God designed that the elder should serve the younger, that the birth-right and the blessing should both be entailed upon Jacob, and that his family and not his brother's, should be the line to which the promises belonged. Jacob had twelve sons, eight by the two daughters of Laban, Leah and Rachel, who w^ere lawfully connected with him in marriage, and four by his two concubines, * In the genealogy recorded in the xi. chap, of Gen. the first Kahor is the son of Serug, the second, son of Terah, father like- wise of xA.braham and Haran. It then runs thus, Seiug the father of Nahor ; Nahor the father of Terah, and Terah the father of Abram, Nahor and Haran. , f Heb.xi. 15. t Gen.xxv.C. 96 THE LITERAI, SEED Bilhah and Zilpah, who were the maids of his two wives *. The sons of Jacob, though all equally included in the promises, were not, however, all on a level, as it res, pected the genuineness and morality of their character. It is well known that Reuben and Judah were both guilty of incest, and that all the brethren, Benjamin excepted, hated f^oor Joseph, and '' could not speak peace- ably to him t," for no other reason than that, because the Lord was with him. By a variety of singular turns of providence, they were led into Egypt— there oppressed for a long season — de^ * The following Table of Jacob's family, it is conceived, ma'-' be useful to some readers. The children which Leah bare, wer« 1 Reuben, 2 Simeon» 3 Levi, 4 Judah, 9 Issachar, 10 Zebulun, and also a daughter whose name vvai Dinali^ Tliose of Rachel, were Ji Joseph, 12 Benjamin. Those of Bilhah, Racbel''s maifl, were 5 Dan, 6 Naphtali. Those, of Zilpah, LeaVs maid, were 7 Gad, 8 Asher. Excepting Benjanjin, whose birth is mentioned chap. xxxv. IS, the rest are all to be found in the end of the xxix. and xxx. chap, as having taken place before they left Laban. From the abore statement, the reader will also perceive the propriety of that ob- servation of old Jacob when he was a dying, " Simeon and Levi are brethren" &c. xlix. 5. xliii. 30, f Gen. xxvii. 4. OF ABRAHAM. 97 iivefed from It — conducted through the wilderness— and at last put in possession of the promised land. With respect to nations, God generally deals with them in their national capacity, even in this life ; bles- sing or punishing them according to their deserts. It was thus that he punished the old woild, the cities of the plain, overturned successively the great empires which held all the nations in subjection, threatened the destruction of Nineveh, gave the Jews a settlement in the land of Canaan, and at last cast them out. When the promise of that land was first uttered, it was inti- mated that four hundred years must elapse ere it could be accomplished ; and this was given as a reason, that the " iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full *." But that the Jews, though professors af the worship of the only true God, might not glory over these idolatrous and wicked nations, they were positively informed, that if they should be guilty of like crimes, the land would also vomit them out, as it had done its former inhabi- tants t . The way in which God has blessed or punished na- tions, has generally been by sending peace and plenty among them ; or by visiting them with war, pestilence and famine, which overturned, depopulated, humbled, and brought them to their senses. All these instru- ments were employed in delivering his people from EgyP^ ^^ preserving them in the wilderness, and in giving them an establishment in the promised land. * Gen. XV. 16. , • t In illustration of this fact, see what Bishop Newton says res- pecting the curse denounced upon Canaan, the son of Noah, and father of the Canaanites. It refers as much to the conduct of that people, (for they were to be a cursed people) as to the punishment •consequent thereupon, Vol. I. N 98 THE LITERAL SEED The nations were so sensible that there was sonw* thing more than human in all this, that even the hard- ened Pharaoh was forced to acknowledge the finger of God, and many of the other nations compelled to apply- to their imaginary deities to protect them from the arm of the Lord of "Hosts. And to keep the Israelites them- selves in their proper situation, duly were they remind- ed that it was not by their sword, or their bow, or any might of their own, thattheyhadobtained their victories. Never to any nation had the Lord dealt as to that of Israel. And all that he had promised to Abraham the founder of it, he accomplished ; and the accomplishment was so wonderful, as must have struck the beholders with admiration. He had indeed promised to be their God; but little did they know, perhaps, that he was to dwell among them by symbols of his visible presence, and that the ark of his testimony, which was afterwards erected, was to be such a manifestation of his power and glory. The words of Moses as applied to the Israelites shortly before their crossing of the Jordan, are astonishingly applicable to them as a nation through- out the whole of the period they were united in that capacity. '* Remember the days of old, consider the years of many generations : ask thy father and he will shew thee, thy elders and they will tell thee : When the Most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the childrea of Israel. For the Lord's portion is his people ; Jacob is the lot of his inheritance. He found him in a desert- land, and in a waste howling wilderness j he led him about, he instructed him, he kept him as the apple of his eye. As an eagle stirreth up her nest, fluttereth over her young, spreadeth abroad her wings, taketli. them J beareth them on her wings ; so the Lord alone. OF ABRAHAM. 9f) <{icl lead him, and tliere was no strange god with him. He made him ride on the high places of the earth, that he might eat the increase of the fields, and he made him to suck honey out of the rock, and oil out of the flinty rock. Butter of kine, and milk of sheep, with fat of lambs, and rams of the breed of Bashan, and goats, with the fat of kidneys of wheat, and thou didst drink the pure blood of the grape *.'* To a people thus blessed and honoured by their Ma- ker, it was but a natural expression of their love, tliat they should in their turn honour and reverence him. God, by becoming their God, constituted them his peo- ple ; and that they might know what kind of reverence was due to so glorious a Majesty, he promulgated to lliem his laws. It has been thought by some, that the law delivered at Sinai demanded nothing more than external obedience, and that 'if this had been only adhered to, they should not only have secured, on the part of God, a perfor- mance of all the promises, but that he, demanding no- thing more, would be perfectly satisfied with such ex- terior worship aiid obedience. To us, however, it ap- pears in a very difFercnt light. We even question if ever such obedience was required by God at any pe- riod, or on any occasion, of any of his moral creatures. What, for instance, could be more carnal or external in its nature, than the obedience of a servant to his mas- ter ? But that even this was not to be a mere bodily service, but to flow from the heart, and to be done, not as to men, but to the Lord, is abundantly evident from Scripture.' And tlius extensive and spintual, and de- manding nothing less tlian the homage of the hea^t, should we consider the whole of God's commandments. When, therefore, we speak of his promulgating laws, * Deut. xxxii. 7, — 14i. 100 THE LITERAL SEED we do not suppose that those laws were designed to re- gulate merely their conduct in life, while the principles of the heart were left out of the question. To love the Lord their God with all their heart, and soul, and strength, and mind, this was the first and great com- mandment. And that God has an indisputable claim upon all his intelligent, and therefore accountable crea- tures, for such worship and reverence, is abundantly clear from the nature of the thing. If he created and supports them, and if he had no other reason for his so doing but his own glory, this would not only be the least thing that they could do; but to act otherwise would be defeating the very end for whicli they were made. But he had still a higher claim upon the people of Israel. He had not only selected theiu to be /«j-,'in the covenant he gave to Abraham, but he liad delivered them from the land of Egypt, and from the house of bondage. He had signified also his designs to cast out the nations before them, and to give them fields which they sowed not, vine-yards, and olive-yards, and or- chards which they planted not, cities which they built not, wells which they digged not, houses filled with all good things, a land flowing with milk and honey, and in which they might drink abundantly the pure blood of the grape. Surely then, love and gratitude to so migh- ty a Deliverer, so kind a Benefactor, were but the na- tural returns of sensibility and reason, on- the part of the receivers ; and whether therefore they were so in- genuous as to render them or not, their duty wjis the same, and their guilt a thousand-fold aggravated, in case of non-performance. Again, God was not only to be the God of the nation of Israel, but he was to be their King. As a king, he enacted laws, appointed judges to carry them into ef- OF ABRAHAM. 101 feet, and could always be consulted, and his mind ob- tained by the Shechinahy or visible representation of his glorious presence, which he had placed among them. Thus were they as a nation more complete in them- selves than any other nation of the earth. Their seeking to be conformed to others therefore, either in regard of the object of their worship, or of the power by which they were to be regulated and governed, were crimes the most heinous in their nature of which they could be guilty. This would have been in effect denying the Lord who had redeemed them, and calling in question his right to prescribe such laws and statutes, as, in his own infinite wisdom, he saw to be best. On this basis, therefore, lay the great controversy between God and that nation. As the whole world had bf*a^ given to idolatry, and had changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to winged fowls, and quadrupeds, and crawling reptiles * ; the communication which Israel had with other nations, and the same natural depravity of heart, made them ea- ger to learn their ways. Not satisfied therefore with the Lord's own appointments, to choose him for their God and their Kifig, they must needs have gods of their own invention^ and kings from among themselves^ like the other nations of the earth. Often, therefore, was that nation sunk into so dismal a state by their propensity to these sins, that it was dif- ficult to find almost any true and spiritual worshippers among them. And often were their prophets com mis- ' sione^ with the most doleful tidings, that the Lord had seen their wickedness, and behold it was worse than Sodom ; and that therefore he would root up, and ex- terminate them from the land, that they might know * Rom. i. 23. 102 THE LITERAL SEED and be confounded, and never open their mouth anjr more, because of their shame and their iniquity *. Hence their repeated wars, their subjugations by other nations, and their consequent captivities. It was decla- red in the laws of the Lord, that the man that doeth tJiem should live bg them. And accordingly, when the whole nation had avouched the Lord to be their God, as he had done them to be his people, and were cai-eful to walk in all the commandments, statutes, and ordinances which he had given them, the peace and prosperity of the whole nation in such seasons of obedience, is very remarkable. Instances of this will be found in the times of the judges, and of the pious kings of Judah ; the former being careful to walk in the ways which the Lord had directed ; the latter, to correct the abuses into which the people had run, and to re-establish that an- cient worship from which they had swerved. And thus it was, even with the whole nation, when the administra- tion of justice and judgment were observed by the kings, princes, and governors of the land, even though at no period can it be reasonably supposed that the heart of every individual was right with God. A fact this, which cannot be controverted, and which tends much to shew in what light Israel, as a nation, were the people of the Lord, and how the blessings he had promised were to be secured to them in their national capacity. When thus speaking of their distinction, as a nation, from the other nations of the world, it is necessary to 4>e observed, that they were never allowed to conform to others, but that others sojourning among them, beho- ved necessarily to conform to them, or else there could be no intercourse between them. Nor did such permis- sion extend further than to individuals, and that to those * See the whole of the prophecies of Ezekiel, particularly ch=. xvj. and the prophecies in general. OF ABRAHAM. lO.^i «nly sojourning in their own land ; for supposing that whole nations had wished to have formed an alliance \vith Israel, and to have become one with them, the people of Israel, for very important reasons which we shall presently notice, were not at liberty to form any such alliances *. * This was an error into which some of the Jews ran however, as we learn from JosephuSj Jewish Antiq. B. XIII. c. ix. § 1. and X. § 3. We conceive the following observations on this subject by Mr Pirie, to be exceedingly just. Speaking of the difference between the Old and New Testament states of the church, he asks, wherein did it consist ? ' This deserves particular attention,' he says. ' The Gentiles, we have seen, were admitted to both ; ' but not on the same footing. The civil polity, or law of tlie * state, did not admit Gentiles to become naturalized subjects of * the Jewish commonwealth. Canaan, by the law, was divided * among the tribes of Israel, according to their families, and what- ' ever portion of the land was assigned by lot to a family, it was * hereditary to that family, so that Tt could not be alienated, even * to a brother Jew, but for a time ; much less could it become the * property of a stranger for ever, or even for a single day. Gen- ' tiles then could only be admitted among Israel in the character * of strangers and sojourners, incapable of being fellow-heirs, or of * holding landed property among them. Servants they might be, * according to the law, or they might trade with the Jews occa- * sionally, but brethren they could not be. So high, so strong was * the wall of partition reared by the political law of that nation * between Jews and Gentiles.' — See bis Letters to Mr M'Lean, p. 92. These observatioiiSj as we have already noticed, we conceive to be just; but we cannot avoid here detecting a principle. held by Mr P. which is not only incompatible with his sentiments as given above, but which it is impossible to understand what he really means by it. He says, in the first place, that the land of Canaan was never promised nor designed for any but the believing seed of Abraham. Then he maintains, that Gentiles were never admitted into church fellowship with the Jews, but upon the profession of their faith, which, by consequence, must have entitled them to be iCckoned among the number of this ipiritual seed. And yet, after Wi' THE LITERAL SEED But we mentioned, that in speaking of the natural seed of Abraham, to whom the promises belonged, it Was necessary to distinguish, not merely between them and the other nations of the world, but between them and their brethren, who, though of the same family, had neither right nor title to the same privileges. Both Ishmael and Esau, though descendents of Abraham equally with Isaac and Jacob, were not however inclu- ded among the people whom the Lord chose for him- self ; and therefore, being separated, they became found- ers of nations distinct by themselves. The Ishmaelites or Midianites, as they are sometimes called in Scrip- ture *, or Arabs, Scenites, Saracens, &:c. as we find them denominated in after times — a most numerous and powerful people, were the descendents of Ish- mael. And as for Esau, he was also the founder of a nation^ namely, the kingdom of Edom. The Edomites were also numerous and powerful, but though they ma^ nifested their enmity to their brethren the Israelites, they were not able to prevail ; so that in them, the an- cient prediction, that the elder should serve the younger, was accomplished in their final subjugation by the Is- raelitish arms. And as for the other children which Abraham had by Keturah, though we cannot affirm that they became a people distinct by themselves, certain we are that they were separated from the seed to which the promise be- all, we find him here declaring, as facts obliged him to do, that these spiritual childreii of Abraham were incapacitated, evidently on account of their not being related to him according to the fleshy though they were by faith, ' to hold landed property in Canaan for a single day.' Thus loose, inconsistent, inexplicable 1 is Mr Pirie's theory on this subject. — See the whole of his reasoning on article 4« of his 5th Letter, and indeed his work throughout. * Gen. xxxvii. 28. t)F ABRAHAM. lOj longed, even from the beginning ; and we have everj reason to believe tliat what was thus done hy the sanc- tion of Abraham, would be scrupulously adhered to by his after descendents. In contemplating the many thousand descendents of Abraham, as many, or more perhaps, by those who were never in the covenant, by Ishmael, and Esau, and his six sons by Keturah, as by those who were in it; it is gloomy and even contradictory to think, according to the common interpretation, of the covenant, being the covenant of grace, (we mean in the sense of which we are speaking), and of course devoting to eternal pei;- dition all who were not within its bounds, and saving, as it necessarily must do, all who were, however wicked and profligate as we have seen the lives of somq of them to have been. But there ire contrary facts in existence, which, when only known, would lead any re- flecting mind to question ail such interpretations, and all such systems as are built vipon them. Jethro, Moses* father-in-law, who was a Midianitish priest, doubtless was a wise and good man, and one who feared the Lord, though he was not in the line of thos6 who were reckr oned in the covenant*. It is very probable that he was * Here, I doubt not but some will be ready to cry out— a thing not uncommon in the present day — ' Did you ever hear such ig- * norance ? He seems to be entirely unacquainted with hi< sub- * ject I Do loe maintain that no person co/iul be saved, but such as * were in reality within the precincts of the Jewish church V To which I would reply — Ignorant of what you may really ivish to be at, I humbly confess myself to be ; but of what are the fair and i^gitimate consequences of your principles, I abso,lutelv deny that this is the case. I do not say that you assert, in so many words, that none but such as were in the Jewish church could be saved. But don't you assert, that the covenant which was given to Abraham, i:nd to them through him, to be the covenant of grace ? And have we not already proved, that neither Ishmael, nor Abraham's sons by Keturah, nor yet F.sau, nor any of their descendents, had any o 106 THE LITERAL SEED a descendent of Abraham ; for as the Ishmaelites were called Midianites in the passage already alluded to'% and as the Midianites must therefore have descended, either from Ishmael, the son of Abraham by Hagar, or froni Midian, one of his sons by Keturah ; whichever of them it might be, it proves that Jethro, pr6vided he was a Midian, as we know he was a priest among them, was a descendent of Abraham ; and that though in the line of those excluded frpm that covenant in the ac- ceptation of which we speak, he was not excluded however from what is, strictly speaking, the covenant of grace. , Job may be considered as another instance of the same truth. It is generally supposed that he lived prior to Moses ; but that it was subsequent to that of Abraham, is pretty evident from the circumstance of one of Job's friends, Bildad, being a Shuhite, evi- dently a descendent of Shuah, one of Abraham's sons by Keturah f . Who were the progenitors of Job, is more than we can say ; but certain it is, that he was not a descendent of Abraham in the line of Jacob, and consequently not a child of the promise. Nor was he a sojourner among them, but lived in the east country, in that country to which Abraham sent the sons of the concubines. Yet was he a spiritual worshipper of the God of the whole earth ; and though not of that line to whom the promises were given, yet was he not ex= tight or title to that covenant, at least in this sense ? Now if it'be, as you maintain, the covenant of grace, and restricted to one par- ticular branch of Abraham's descendents, and if all the others were cut oif from having- any interest therein, it then follows of course, that none could be saved but the members of the covepsnt : —And that it would save them infallibly, is as demonstrable as the other. * Gen. xxxvii. 28. ■{• Job and his friends dwelt in the east, and thither it was that Abraham sent his children, Gen. xxv. 6. OF ABRAHAM. 107 eluded from the blessings of eternal life, which he knew and believed were to come through the Redeemer^ Job xix. 25. &c. Those descendents of Abraham who were not of the promise, carrying" with them the knowledge of the true God, might preserve it ampng them for many genera- tions, by which means thousands of them might be sa- ved. Indeed, it is so gross to suppose that exclusion from the proirflse of God to Abraham, as it respected his family, or retention in it, was retention or exclusion from the family of God, as it respected their eternal state, that it. requires very little argument in order to correct it. This leads us again to repeat some of the reasons why Abraham's family by Isaac and Jacob appears to have been selected and distinguishedj not only from the nations in general, bat from the numerous branches which sprung from the same root. The distinguishing reason, we humbly apprehend, as indeed we have main- tained all along^ was the descent of the Messiah in that particular line ; nor do we suppose that ever there would have been any such selection, had it not been for the accomplishment of this grand event. There has no- thing happened similar to it, either before or since 5 and the event has shewn, that though the Jews have remain- ed, even to the present times, a distinct people, yet their distinction is not of that kind which could now promote the end for which they were at first set apart. They are still distinguished as a people, it is true, but jum- bled together as to tribes ; so that, supposing the Mes- siah not ^to have come, it would be impossible now to distinguish him in the ordinary, and of course the most satisfactory way, when he does come. He was to come of the tribe of Judah, and of the family of David ; but, not to mention the predictions of the titnej as given 108 THE LITERAL SEED by Daniel, even the familj and the tribe can never be ascertained as the accomplishment of prophecy, with- out regular registers and records from tlie first to the latest period. And if the Jews in the present day ha'^e nothing ©f this kind to produce, it forms, in our opi- nion, the strongest presumption that their Messiah lias indeed come, and that it is in vain for them to look for another. Still, however, not to say much of the pi'o- phecies of the nine, we say, that down t^ the period in which we assert he did come,- such registers and records were regularly kept ; and whenever they came to fall into disuse, it was the clearest demonstration that Pro- vidence had no more to do with them, and therefore permitted them to fall to the ground, like the other pe- culiarities of their system ; ■vvhich, we say, were first appointed for the sake of bringing forth the Messioh^ and received in general their completion by his ad- vent. As there are many things recorded of the natural de- scendents of Abraham subsequent to this era, however, so a word or two respecting these may not be improper. The Scriptures say^ that they were cast off because of un- belief, but that when they shall turn to the Lord their God, and worship him with a true heart, they shall be re- ceived in again. But it is worthy to inquire, why do they still remain a distinct people? Why, though scattered through so many different nations, who differ so much from each other in customs, manners, and religion, &c. do they yet differ from them all, and are one amongst themselves, scattered as they are in all the regions of the earth ? This fact is sa striking, that you may know a Jew to be a Jew in any region of the world ; for what they are as to their distinguishing peculiarities in any one place, that they are all the world over. Thus wc consider tliem, though not designing it themselves, as a OF ABRAHAM. 109 witness for God — as a standing testimony to the truth of his gospel — a miracle daily performed^ so to speak, in the face of the whole world, which all the cavils of scoffers and infidels will never be able to overturn. On the same score of evidence, we may refer also to the de- scendents of Abraham by Ishmael, the history of whom Well illustrates the accuracy with which the ancient pre- dictions concerning them have been accomplished, as has been both ably and clearly shewn by Bishop Newton on the prophecies. Thus have we finished what we intended to say re- spect-'ng the natural seed of Abraham^ In our next section, we shall make a few remarks respecting his spi- ritual seed, or seed by faith. SECTION III. Of the spiritual Seed of Abraham. JTJlS a spiritual seed is something entirely different from a natural,- it is necessary^ in the first place, to shew in what the difference consists^ and to describe the manner in which men are constituted spiritual. Here then it ought to be observed, though indeed it be a truth ge- nerally admitted, that all men are naturally on a level before God. The universal depravity of human nature is a doctrine clearly taught in Scripture 5 and certain epithets are employed to distinguish those who are still labouring under this native depravity, from such as have been happily freed from it by the gospel of the grace of God. The two great heads of these respective bodies are distinguished from each other ; the one being 110 THE sriRITUAL SEED Styled the earthly, the other the heavenly Adam *. And in conformity to the heads, so are the members. They in like manner partake of the nature of their respective heads ; for those who are of the earthly man, are earth- ly, and speak of the earth ; and those who are of the heavfenly, are heavenly, and have their conversation in heaven, whence also they look for the Saviour f. To constitute men partakers of the first nature, it is only necessary that they be born of men ; but to con- stitute them partakers of the second, it is necessary that they be born of God. The change thus produced, in bringing men out of darkness into God's marvellous light, is always accom- panied with a belief of the truth. As Abraham belie- ved in the Lord, and it was counted to him for riehte- ousness ; so they also believing in the same object, are hence counted Abraham's children, and their persons are justified in like manner. To be believers of the truth of God, therefore — to be born again — to be created anew in Christ Jesus — to be justified, adopted, and sanc- tified— are teims nearly of the same import, or insepa- rable the one from the other, and all relate to one and the same character. Such v/as the character of Abra- ham as a spiritual parent, and such is the character of his spiritual children. Abraham, by the grace of God, was enabled to ex- ercise faith in a most remarkable manner ; and God, that he might put an honour upon his own work, con- stituted him the father of all believers, from the begin- ning to the end of the world. This situation, in its ori- s^inal appointment, has something very peculiar in it. ' When his name was changed from Abram, which sig- nifies a father by eminence, to Abraham, which denotes the father of a multitude, this was assigned by Jeho- *1 Cor. XV. 45. t John la. 31. Phil. iii.20. OF ABRAHAM. Ill vah aS a reason, ** For a Father of many nations I have made (or constituted) thee," Gen. xvii. 5. The word father^ in this passage, should not only be connected with the change of the name, but with "j^nn 3, which our translators have rendered made^ and which properly signifies to be constituted or appointed to a particular thing*. It thus denotes the sense in which Abraham was the Father of many nations, and distinguishes be- tween the relation in which he stands to them, and that in which he stood to his natural posterity. The last was a relation of an ordinary kind, and denoted no more, even in Abraham, than what it does in any other human character. The first however is far otherwise. Here there is no relation by natural descent, nor any, but sucli as flows from a similarity of internal principles and dis- positions, and which can be alone produced by the power of the truth upon the mind. Hence, that very truth which Abraham believed, is said to beget othecs to a belief of it likewise ; and on this account, all believers being the children of faith, and begotten of the truth, Abraham is styled their father f . It is an appointment f Macknight says, * In the Hebrew it is Nathattecha, — Dedi tCy — I ha've given thee. LXX. ri^HKX * 1 Cor. i. £e. &. James ii. 5. H4 OT THE PRIVILEGES ENJOYED iiihferitance in this transitory state, yet as that seemgf only to have been for certain reasons peculiar to them- 5e]ves, so, in speaking of the temporal good things which the spiritual Israel of God in general enjoy, we do not think it would be proper to take the promise of that land to Abraham and his literal deseendents, for our pattern. Though the heathen, for instance, be pro- mised to Christ for an inheritance, and the uttermost ends of the earth for a possession, yet this is to be ta- ken only in a spiritual sense ; nor is there a promise in the whole Scriptures, on any particular portion of the world more than another, to which the converted among the nations are to resort. It then follows that the general covenant with Noah, that *' while the earth should remain, seed time,' and harvest, and summer, and winter, should never cease ;" and the grant, that *' every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for man, even as the green herb was from (he beginning *," are the only examples and patterns to which we can refer. And to these agrees the doctrine of our Saviour, when speaking of the same subject f * *' Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink ; nor yet for your body, what ye slvall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body more than raiment ? Behold the fowls of the air j for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns ; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are not ye much better than they ? And why take ye thought for raiment ? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow : they toil not, neither do they spin ; and yet I say unto you, that even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. Wherefore, if God so vlothe the grass of the field, which to-day is in the field, * iGen. Ix, 3. t Matt. vi. 25. &c. BY THE SPIRITUAL SEED. Ii5 and to-morrow is cast Into the oven, shall he not much more clothe you, O ye of little faith ?" If, then, religion hath the promise of the life that now is, as well as of that which is to come ; if in the keep- ing of the commandments, there is a great, a present reward ; if God even mitigates and shortens the judg- ments he sends upon the earth for the sake of his elect; if he would not have destroyed Sodom, had he found only t.en righteous in it ; if he feed the ravens that cry unto him, and give meat in due season to all who wait upon him — surely so many demonstrations of his good- ness, clearly evince thr.t '' the Lord is very pitiful, and of tender mercy, and will not suffer those who trust in him to lack any good thing *." But as it is not by miracle we are to expect the sup- ply of our wants, but by the ordinary means God hath appointed, by tilling, sowing, and labouring with our hands ; we must be up and doing our duty, and be di- ligent in business at the same time we are fervent in spirit ; knowing that if any will not work, neither should he eat ; and that lie who provideth not for his owD, and especially for those of his own house, hath denied tlie faith, and is worse than an infidel f. Such are the temporal privileges of believers ; and we have the experience of one who says, *' I have been young, and now am old ; yet have I never seen the righteous forsaken, nor his seed begging their bread.'* No, indeed ; the hand of the diligent makcth rich, and qualifieth him to stand before kings, and not before mean men |. With respect to their sjjiriiual privileges, eye hath * James v. 11. &. Psal. xxxiv. 10. f Rom. xii. 1 1. St 1 Tim. v. 8. t Psal. xxxvii,i.'5. Truv x. 4 3c x.xii. 29. 11-6 OF THE PRIVILEGES ENJOYED not seen, nor ear heard, neither could it enter into the heart to conceive the things ivhich God hath prepared, and revealed in the Scriptures, for them that love him. As their situation was once the most deplorable, being without God, and without Christ, and without hope in the world, so now, through grace, is it most blessed in- deed, having obtained peace with God through their Lord Jesus Christ *. We might here enumerate all the blessings of the new covenant, or covenant of grace ; or, in other words, that old covenant which was formed and planned in the councils of eternity, ere the world began, and which is termed new, because it was never ratified, so to speak, save in a symbolical and typical manner, till the shed- ding of the blood of Christ in this new dispensation, which is the blood of this new and everlasting cove- nant. This covenant which regards the salvation of the guilty, and which is indissoluble and eternal in its na- ture, extends to the whole elect of God who ever have, or do, or shall exist in the world. It knows no distinc- tion between Jew and Gentile, barbarian, Scythian, bond or free, male or female. The only distinction it recognizes, is a distinction of character, alone produced by the belief of this very gracious expedient. And as it is character alone which it recognizes, so there are certain terms it applies to those who possess the cha- racter, to distinguish them from others. In plain lan- guage, devoid of all figures, they are distinguished as believers, righteous, justified, sanctified, &:c. In figu- rative language, they are called Jews, Israelites, the circumcision, the children of God, and children of the promise, and seed of Abraham, and so on. But it is tq \>t observed, that to these figurative expressions, there I* J Cor.ii.9. Eph.ii.l2. and Rom. v. J. BY THE SPIRITUAL SEED. 147 »fe generally annexed some qualifying phrases, which, on the one hand, shew that they are not used in the li- teral sense, and on the other determine the sense in which they are employed. When the term Jew^ for instance, is employed in this spiritual sense, they are said not to be Jews outward/j/^ but iniuardh/ *. Circtttn- dsion is distinguished in like manner, and also by a Ivor shipping of God in the Spirit f. Israel^ by the ex- pression, that they are not al/ Israel who are of Is- rael:!:. And when they are represented as the children of God, or children of the promise, or seed of Abraham, then we are referred to the typical signification of the hirth of Isaac, who was the child of the promise ; and thus are we led to conclude, from the ivth chapter of Galatians^ that his supernatural birth by the power of God typified the regeneration, or new birth, produced in the souls of men by the same power §. Thus we see in the case, both of Abraham and of Isaac, that while the one was constituted the father of all belie- vers, the circumstances attending the birth of the. other, were of such a nature, as figuratively to repre- sent this relation, which subsists between Abraham and his spiritual children, * Rom. ii. 28, 29. f FJ.iil. iii. 3, % Rom. ix. 6. § This is evidently Ike light in which the apostle there placed the subject. It is Isaac's birth only, and Ishmael's, which are there spoTien of as being typical. And the one typified the rCa', spiritual, and free-born people O'f.God in all ages. The other, the state of the Jews as a nation, from the days of Abraham, or more properly speaking, of their great legislator, till the coming of Christ. And as it was the very nature of that dispensation to convince of sin, and so keep the sinner in bondage, till he found an escape by faith in the promised seed which was yet to come } the type, Ishmael, and the bond-njaid, would also fitly repre- sent the moral state of the whole human race in the sight of God. lis OF THE PRIVILEGES ENJOYED In speaking of the privileges of the spiritual people of God, therefore, we ought just to pursue the same method in both dispensations ; for all the blessings of the new dispensation existed in the ^ old, under a varie- ty of types, and shadows, and symbolical representa- tion : so that, were we to draw a contrast between the two^ we might see that in point of clearness indeed, iJus which succeeds, excels much that which went be- fore, but that still one and the same object, and of course privilege, was common to both. It is upon this principle that the apostle, in writing to the Hebrews, proceeds ; and hence we contend earnestly for that ad- mirable unity which runs through the whole of the plan of mercy. All was designed to teach the same heavenly truths ; to bring in the whole world as guilty before God ; to shew that there is but one way of sal- vation, and one only, for Jews and Gentiles, old and young ; for those born of believing parents, and those who are not ; and that such as af^e converted in every age and nation, and they only, are to be reckoned in the spiritual sense ; the children of Abraham by faith, and heirs, to whom the inheritance in this highest and most excellent sense shall undoubtedly be made sure. For the further illustration of this subject, the reader is referred, in the ^rst place, to the epistle to the Hebrews, in which he will find the subject as it re- gards the spiritual import of the former dispensation, explained by an infallible guide ; and in the next place, to all the epistles addressed to the churches, in which both the present privileges and future prospects of be- lievers are so fully detailed, that, to do justice to the subject, it would be necessary to quote a great propor- tion of them verbatim. BY THE SPIRITUAL SEED. 14-9 Conceiving these hints to be sufficient however for such as choose to investigate the subject for them- selves : without enlarging on them therefore, we shall proceed to the consideration of the next thing proposed, which regards the permanency of the cove- nant in all its parts. This will accordingly be the sub- ject of the next chapter. CHAPTER IV, THE rERMANENCY OF THE COVENANT IN ALL ITS PARTSo * N our fourth general hesd^vve proposed to treat of the p'^rui'.iiiency of the Abrahamic covenant in all its parts j or, in other words, whether the same state of things is to remain under the Christian^ as under the legal dis- pensation ; or if they be altered, in what does the alter- ation consist ? — what things were abrogated, and what remain ? ^ That the same state of things as was established by the legal dispensation, or even by the covenant with Abraham, was not always to continue, is manifest from the apostles'.decree in the assembly at Jerusalem ; and that it was not to*be wholly overturned, is equally ob- vious from our Lord's declaration, that he came not to destroij the law and the prophets- Was there therefore any alteration in this covenant, or if there were, in what did the alteration consist ? Why was it continued the same till Christ came ? Why was an alteration made at that period, rather than any other ? In what did the alteration consist ? And what was the state of things after it took place ? — Answers to these important ques- tions will form the subject of the present chapter. We shall begin, therefore, with inquiring into the nature of the Abrahamic covenant respecting its perma^ 7iencij. In our investigation of this subject, in chap. I. we have seen that the covenant with Abraham consist-* THE PERMANENCY, &CC. 151 ed of various parts ; the principal of which were a car- nal seed and carnal possessions, and a spiritual seed and spiritual possessions ; the first relating entirely to the life which now is, the latter to that also which is to come. From its very nature then, it is evident that the carnal part, and all other things connected with it, as a dispensation, must have had but a limited duration, and behoved to terminate in time. What these things were, therefore, is surely an objfct worthy of regard, and the next thing in course demanding our attention. That the covenant with Abraham was closely con- nected with the Jaiu afterwards instituted by ^Rloses, seems clear from what the apostle says, that ii was add- ed^ on account of transgressions, till the seed came. Gal. iii. 19. But we liave already referred to a declaration of our blessed Lord, that the law and the prophets were not to be destroyed ; and the apostle Paul, in that very chapter just quoted, says a great deal to prove the in- dissoluble nature of the Abrahamic covenant also. Are we from these two texts then to infer, that neither tlie law on the one hand, nor the covenant with Abraham on the other, were hence to undergo any alteration, but that both were to remain the same in all their parts, to the end of the world ? As the epistle to the Hebrews evidently shews the very reverse, as it respects the law, and the apostolic decree, Acts xv. in abrogating circum- cision^ which, we are assured, ivas not of Moses, but of the fathers *, we have hence divine authority for an alteration in both, and the question comes to be in ivhat F In attempting an answer to this question, I do riot pretend to say that I shall be so minute as to rr.cntiou nvery particular ; being convinced that if wc shall only * John vii. 22. 152 THE PERMANENCY OF THE COVENANT have the happiness to strike the leading points, it will be perfectly sufficient for our purpose. As the covenant with Abraham was distinguished into two principal parts, carnal and spiritual, so may the whole of the Mosaic law be distinguished into two likewise, namely, ceremonial and moral. ,, There seems to me therefore to be an amazing affini- ty between the carnal part of the covenant, and the ce- remonial part of the law ; and again, between the spiri' tual part of the covenant, and the moral part of the law ; so much so, that really had they been given all at once, and not one part suspended for four hundred and thirty years after the other, it would have appeared quite consistent, and a beautiful harmony would have run through it as a whole. If these observations be just, it will hence follow, that the corresponding parts of the law and the promise, must stand or fall together ; and that, from their nature, the spiritual and moral parts must outlive the carnal and ceremonial, yea, endure when time shall be no lon- ger ; while the other, from their nature, must termi- nate in time. In answer to the question therefore, which respects the time^ when such alterations were to take place, we can with confidence say, that the ceremonial part of the law received its fulfilment in the advent and work of Messiah ; and, for our part, we see no reason to enter- tain a doubt respecting the abrogation of the carnal part of the covenant, occurring at this period likewise. In a former part of this inquiry *, we trust we have shewn to satisfaction, that the carnal possessions granted to Abraham and his seed, in the covenant God made with him, as matter of fact, were taken from them at that time j so that we have now only to prove the ab- * Chap. I. Sect. 3. IN ALL ITS PARTS. 15'S rogation of the other carnal part, that is to say, Abra- ham's seed according to the flesh. We have elsewhere remarked, that there does not ap- pear in the whole oracles of truth, another transaction similar to that in which God gave a particular portion «f the earth to his church and people ; and the singula^ rity of his promise to Abraham respecting his seed in a particular line, seems so much a-kin to this, that we cannot but class them together. We say that this pror mise was singular^ for nothing similar had e-^'pr .been in the church before ; and it remains a matter of dis- pute between Baptists and Pedo-baptists, whether any thing like it existed afterwards. It can be questioned Jjy none, I will venture to say, that the promise to Abraham respecting his seed^ was given at the time that the promise of the Saviour was restricted to his family. Nor was it all his seed, but his seed only in a certain line that had any interest therein. As the apostle there- fore, in emmierating the privileges of the Jews, Rom. }x. mentions this among the rest, " whose are the fataers, and of whom, ai concernuig the flesh, Christ came," does it not hence appear, that this was the principal rea- son why they, in contradistinction fi'om all others, vrere selected ? If it had been merely as descendents of bc- iieving parents, why not include all the children ? If Ihis.had been all the purpose to have been gained, had rtis''m.e-i!: prefixed to it. l€4f DISTIKGUJSHIKG MARKS OF contrary, were not their fathers idolaters, and that of the vilest kind, " who sacrificed their children to be de- voured," and caused them to " pass through the fire,'* to their gods * ? And is it not equally evident, that mere natural birth is the only birth here spoken of ; and that being Israelites, and belonging to that nation whom the Lord had chosen for himself, they were therefort said to be born to him ? The same thing is also asserted respecting such Gen- tiles as were admitted into the fellowship of the Jews. It is said that they also were never admitted upon any other ground, than by a profession of faith in the God of Israel. But here tc/D, instead of adducing direct proof, or yet fair deductions from reasoning, the whole is made to rest in the wide field of conjecture. Those who wish to see this subject more fully illustrated, may turn to what we have said in Ch.II. Sect. 1. And to our remarks there, we would just add in this place, that though it is a truth that the Lord always had some spi- ritual worshippers in Israel, and even always required such to worship him ; yet it does not appear, jffrj^, from the case of a whole natural seed being acknowledged by bim as his people, and secondly^ from the case of stran- gers and slaves being obliged, in the first instance, to in- corporate themselves with that nation by the rite of cir- cumcision, in order to their having intercourse with- them, that any thing more was required to give them a place in Israel. It is true, they were to abandon idola- try and every other species of will-worship. But it is equally true,' that even while they were most deeply sunk in these, God still acknowledged them as his peo- ple f . And this he did not merely for one or two gene- * See ver. 21. \ See the xyith of Ezek.iel, to which w«-have already referred. FORMER AND LATTER DISPENSATIONS. IBB rations, but for many ; even tiU Christ came and over- turned the whole of this part of that dispensation, by establishing another upon very different principles. Whether therefore it can be shewn, that conversion was indispensably required in order to membership in the former dispensation, we are confident it is so in or- der to membership in the latter j and we even question whether a single instance can be produced in all the New Testament, in which this did not appear as the first thing which gave any title to a place in this new dispensation. We have seen it required in our Lord's doctrine to Nicodemus. We have seen it exemplified in the Jews who believed on him. And when we turn to the Gentiles, do we not see the apostles preaching, men converted, churches planted, and all proceeding upon the same plan of apparent personal religion, in or- der to personal interest in this new dispensation ? The case of infants, which is the only exception to this that can be alleged, will be considered immediately. But here we are going only upon positive facts ; and facts, as logicians used to say, are stubborn things. Thus then do the two dispensations differ most essen- tially in respect of their subjects, and of the manner in which their subjects were constituted. By mere natu- ral descent, sons and daughters were born to the Lord, in the former dispensation ; but in the latter, they are born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. Li that dispensation, aliens could be added, as in the case of slaves, for in- stance, at the entire will of a master, if he chose to purchase them ; but in this, none can be admitted, nei- ther bond nor free, who do not appear themselves to be and, amongst other passages which rtright be mentioned, the li-t tvi Isaiah, m 166 DISTINGUISHING MARKS OF made free from the law of sin and death*. In this there may be counterfeits, it is granted, and many may seek admission into it, who are ulter strangers to an in- ward change of heart ; but such exceptions do not alter the case, that such a c'nangc is required, nor do they by any means form a paramount to what we find in the other dispensation. Here there is still a profession, though not real, a personal and voluntary profession too ; but there, all personal and voluntary considera- tions seem to have been out of the question, and the subjects bound to submit to it upon the pain of non- employment. A stranger could not sojourn in Israel, unless he became a Jew, nor a Gentile of any nation perform even the work of a menial servant, without becoming altogether such as themselves. Now, that there is nothing like either of these in this new dispen- sation, we solemnly aver. The case of infants then, as we have just hinted, may be considered as the only ex- ception, and on this important subject we shall therefore say a few words. We stated formerly, that It appears to us, that the sole reason why children were included in the former dispensation, was for the sake of bringing forth the Messiah in a particular line. And this we think evi- dent from the circumstance, that children never appear to have been connected with the church of God in the same manner, prior to tlie dajs of Abraham,. That tlie race of the godly should in general run in the line from parents to children, rather than in any other, is not to be wondered at ; for the means of instruction which they indisputably enjoy above others, are surely adapted to such an endf. But tlioiigh such a circumstance might * Rom. viii. 1, 2. t This brings to our n.-( n!ie< tiuu one of llie most strange re- flections of a certain Pedo-baptist, who has appeaitJ rept-atetlly aj FORMER AND LATTER DISPENSATIONS. 16? have existed prior to the days of Abraham, and may continue to exist even to the end of the world, yet this does not necessarily prove that the same state of things existed through the whole of this threefold period, nor yet does it prove, that because children were evidently included in the second or Abrahamic period, that they were therefore inherently endowed with those gracious principles we have seen to be indispensably necessary, ere any can become subjects of the spiritual king- dom. If we are therefore correct in our idea, as it respects the reason why children had a place in the dispensation established with Abraham, we think, it should follow of course, that if there cannot be some as important reason for the retention of children in the church still, it would certainly terminate when the object for which it was chiefly appointed came to be accomplished. And what tends the more to confirm us in this, is the mighty dif- ference between the two dispensations, as to their parti- a champion in that cause, ever we remember of hearing. As if Baptists denied the possibility of their children's conversion, even when grown up, or as if they were to be converted by any other means than through the instrumentality of the trvth, it was insi- nuated, in the case of Mr Carey's sons, the Baptist missionary in India, that -upon his oivn principles, there 'was ati exception from the general rule. What is the general rule then ? Is it that none of the «;iiildren of Baptists, but all the children of Pedo-baptists, shall be 'javed ? Or is it, that any of them shall be saved by any other rueans than by a personal belief of the truth ? Now, if it be alone through the instrumentality of the truth, who enjoy such advan- tages of being early instructed in the knowledge of it, as the chil- dren of believers, whether they be Baptists or Pedo-baptists ? But if the Lord should be pleased in either case to bless the means of his own appointment, of the training up our children in his fear, could it with any propriety be said that it was a deviation from the ^ general rule ? If it be his rule to save only by means of the truth, in. our humble opitjion, it proves the very tevcrsc. 10"^ DISTINGUISHING MARKS OF cular nature and design. The former was adapted in every respect to answer the end we have assigned to it. An infant seed was absolutely necessary for the accom- plishment of the promise, as it respected the Saviour. The land of Canaan too, as a place \n which they might all be kept together, and separated at the same time from all other nations, was no less important ; while circumcision^ a rite to be observed throughout their ge- nerations, fitly marked them out as the descendents of Abraham. And thus when Messiah should appear, there would be no occasion for saying respecting other nations, Lo, here is Christ, or lo, there ; but these cir- cumcised descendents of Abraham were the people of whom, and the land of Palestine the particular spot •where the Messiah should be born. The question then comes to be, is there any thing like this to be obtained by the retention of infants in the church still ? We do not suppose that any, even the most strenuous advocates for the subject, will venture to say so. Indeed, all that they propose by their scheme, amounts to very little. They will tell you, when you come to get your children baptized, ' that the ' blessing of Abraham is come upon the Gentiles — that ' as God promised to be a God to him and to his seed, ' so believers under the gospel have the same promise, ' that he will be likewise a God to them and to their ' seed — that by the administering of this ordinance, we ' do not consider any spiritual blessing to be conferred ' on our children, or yet that it is an indication of their ' final salvation, for they were not all Israel^ nuho are of ' Israel ; but we only administer the token of the co ve- * nant, leaving it with God to make it manifest who ' ateong them shall be accounted for the seed*.' * As a further corroboration of the very small amount of the Pedo baptist principles, even in their own account, see the sum ana FORMER AND LATTER DISPENSATION^. 169 This, to the best of our recollection, is the substance of all that is proposed. And though we have many things to saj of such a representation in general, we will not enter upon them in this place, but shall con- tent ourselves with making a few remarks, by way of contrast, between this and the former dispensation. We here say nothing concerning the sense in which we conceive the blessing of Abraham to be come upon the Qentiles j but as our brethren suppose it to consist in some nameless or particular blessings, (I am at a loss to say which), conferred upon the offspring of Gentile believers, we shall take them upon this score, to see whether the cdpy they draw in any measure corresponds with the original. 1. Was then the promise to Abraham, that God would be a God to him and to his seed, suspended upon such a superficial and slim foundation, as our brethren would here represent the connexion between them and their seed ? I say superficial and x//w, for certainly such any system must be, which proposes to go no further than the merely administering of the token of the co- venant to such as it does not consider at the same time really to be heirs thereof. Such a connexion between believers and their seed, seems to me to amount to no- thing ; because, notwithstanding the seal with which it substance of the whole that Philalethes maintains, comprised in the following sentence of Crito. * I now add,' says Crito, * the ' better city was promised to the fleshly seed of Abraham ; not as ' merely such, but as also elect, these enjoyed' it.* ' Here I beg ' to remark,' says Philalethes, ' that this quotation comprehends * the whole of the hypothesis which I hold, and as I hold it.' And again, at the bottom of the next page, * I am happy to find, ♦ however, that he now admits that the better city was promised ♦ to the fleshly seed of Abraham, though not to all of them, which * ib all ih^it I contend for.' Eiin. E-vang, Mag, vol. iii, pp. 280. Sic, ITO DISTINGUISHING MARKS OF is contended for, the whole is made to depend, even at.- cording to their own account, on the future conversioH of the individuals. If it were a matter only verified in fact, that when they grow up, all the natural off- spring of believers were invariably believers, likewise, then such a token might with propriety be admibistered to them, even while in infancy ; for in this case, it would truly be a previous token of what should afterwards come to pass. But when only a part of this posterity, even suppose it to be the greater part, are converted by the truth, would it not be better to suspend the admini- stration of the token, till the proper subjects had mani- fested themselves ? But it will be said, was it not thus administered to the posterity of Abraham ? True. But we have al- ready proved that the circumstances of Abraham differ- ed very materially from those of any other believer, at any other period of the world. Abraham had two kind^ of seed. He was not to have a carnal seed only, of whom the blessed Saviour was to descend, but he was constituted or appointed to be the father of believers of all nations and ages. It was therefore necessary, from the nature of the thing, to include with himself Abra- ham's natural seed, and to distinguish them from the other nations by such a mark as circumcision was, till the design of their appointment came to be accomplish- ed. But the other species of Abraham's seed was dif- ferently propagated. And it is worthy of remark that Ue^ and not believers themselves, throughout the suc- ceeding periods of the church, is accounted the father. We Gentiles may be the children of Abraham in the spiritual sense, but in the same way that he was, we never can be fathers. If we literally have children,, then we are their fathers, the same as Abraham was tlie father of his natural posterity ; but though we ma^ FORMER AND LATTER DISPENSATIONS. 171 ourselves be the children of Abraham in the spiritual sense, by faith in Christ Jesus, this does not however constitute our natural offspring his children likewise, unless they come to it by the same means. We then take it, that the confounding of these two things, distinct enough, most certainly, in themselves, lias been the cause of all the difficulties and errors on this subject. We plainly perceive that our brethren have not adverted to the fallacy of their own reasoning. Had they only attended to the distinction between Abra- ham's two kinds of seed, and inquired with themselves to luhich of them do we Gentiles belong ? they would not only have been led into a very difterent kind of me- ditation from what it appears they have gone into, but all the direful consequences of disputing and wrangling with one another would have been happily prevented. Oh ! when I reflect on the dismally controversial spirit which has been manifested on this subject, and perceive how easily matters might have been adjusted and brought to an amicable settlement, even by attention to this sin^ gle pointy though I could claim a victory, (a weakness, alas ! too, too common among controversial writers), I could rather feel disposed to shed a tear. I trust that it is not for victory, but for truth that I write j and in- stead of triumphing over my brethren, it is rather my wish, if they have erred, in the spirit of meekness to do all that in me lies, to make the error manifest by^the exhibition of truth, leaving it to themselves, in the pre- sence of Him who shall judge the quick and the dead^ which they shall choose. The answer our brethren would have been led to give to the above question, would have served as a key to -imlock the whole business. The question was — To which of the seeds do we Gentiles belong ? And the answer they would have given it, * Not to the natural^ 172 DISTINGUISHING MARKS OF * but to the spiritual, provided we be possessed of the ' faith of Abraham.' But then they would have rea- soned, * If we ourselves be connected with Abraham ' only by faith, and if this connexion be only spiritual ' and not carnal, how comes it to pass that our children. ' who are connected with us only by carnal descent, can * be included in a covenant which we ourselves had no ' right to till we believed ? Would not this,' they would say, ' be connecting carnal things with spiritual, and to ' the spiritual part of Abraham's seed, joining a carnal ' part, which is perfectly incompatible with the nature * of the thing * ?" 2. Thus it is evident, in the second place, that to fol- low up the contrast, it would be connecting together spiritual and carnal subjects, which by no means accords with the nature and genius of the gospel. The two, it is undeniable, were blended in the former dispensation j but in the latter, a carnal subject, as such, has no place. 3. And lastly, therefore, if the contrast were com- pleted, it would connect the kingdom of our Lord with the kingdoms of this world, and lay a foundation for Christianizing whole nations, as all must be sensi- ble that this was the case in Israel. National Christi- anity indeed has its very basis in the now obsolete Jewish system ; and in vain do those calling themselves dissen- ters, attempt to invalidate one part of this unscriptural state of things now under the gospel, while they up- hold another. The connecting of carnal members with the spiritual body of Christ, which consists of believers of his word, may indeed have several gradations, but one and the same spirit must necessarily be operating in all. If you admit the propriety of now receiving a carnal infant seed into the church, upon the ground that circumcision was administered to such in the former * See Introduction. FORMER AND LATTER DISPENSATION'S. 173 dispensation, you pave the way, by the most natural transition, drawn from the same source, to a complete national establishment. Indeed the one seems, from its very nature, to stand or fall with the other. Yet I know from experience, that it is possible to conceive them to be so completely distinct, that the one may be viewed as the grand source of innumerable errors, while the other may be considered as perfectly scriptural. A lit- tle closer reflection however, would soon convince peo- ple of their mistake. National Christianity I Though this may sound exceedingly harsh in the ears of some people, what is it in the main but the principles of Pe- do-baptists carried to their proper length ? That re- markable saying of our Lord, *' My kingdom is. not of this world," and that description of its subjects, *' They are not of the world, even as 1 am not of the world *V* are not more opposed by the one than by the other. The one lays the foundation, and the other only erects the edifice upon that which was laid. Supposing the scheme of Pedo-baptists but once to exist, through pro- cess of time what were they to do, to be consistent with themselves, with all those whom they baptized, or Christianized as many call it, in their youth, but to ac- knowledge them as Christians, and to give them a place in the church afterwards ? Was not this the plan in Is- rael ? Accordingly this, so far as I linow, is denied by none of them. But many of our brethren, who indeed are aware of the fallacy of religious establishments, yet blind to that system (the Pedo-baptist, to-v/it) wiiich seems to have given rise to these, appear to be so far convinced of the error of their principles however, as to hold them upon a new, but sorry are we to say, more inconsistent ground. Like their brethren in the estHblishment, they look upon the whole natural off- * John xvi.u lii'. l74f DISTINGUISHING MARKS OF spring of believers to be in the covenant, quoting conti- nually that passage, *' The promise is to you, and to your children," &.c. But then, as it is part of their system to maintain purity of communion, by exercising the discipline of God's house towards offending mein- bers, they represent this interest whicli their children have in the covenant, as limited in point of duration entirely to the period of infancj^ and. youth. If they give evidence that they are unbelievers when they grow up, they are to be separated from the churcli ; but by all means, they are always to be considered as mem- bers of it in the first instance *. Nay, some even go the length of regarding them spiritual members, on ac- count of the alleged connection between them and their parents ; and with a good deal of sectarian glee, they will run over such passages as these, " Else were your children unclean, but now are they holy. — If the root be holy, so are the branches," &:c. as if they quoted * I have had frequently occasion to notice inconsistencies ; and though I set out >vith the full determination to offend none whom I ought to love in the bowels of Christian afTection, yet I am ap- prehensive that this will hardly be the case, on account of the plain speech I am necessitated to employ. An incoiJsistency yet more glaring than any we have noticed, here presents itself to view. Notwithstanding all the ado which our brethren make about their children's interest in the covenant and place in the church, we have never yet seen them reduce their principles to practice, and really regard them as church members, as they pre- tend. ' As members,' they say, ' both of God's covenant and * church, they are initiated by baptism ;' but more we never hear of them, perhaps for six, eight, ten, twelve, twenty or thirty years, and of many of them, alas 1 never at all. And when we do hear of any of them, it is only in the way of applying for admission into the church, though it is said they were members of it from the first. Do not facts then demonstrate, and that more strongly than any thing which can be said to the contrary, whit even their owa sentiments are in reoard to this matter > F.DRMER AND LATTER DISPENSATIONS. 175 them in their precise and undeniable sense, and as if no other more scriptural and consistent interpretation could be given of them *. That these are the express views of some Pedo-bap- tists, could ^ be easily shewn from their writings j and we surely may be credited when we say, that we have found many since our thoughts have been turned to this subject, maintaining precisely the same in conversa- tion. But personal ?-ttacks we wish to deal in as little as possible, for which reason we decline referring to particular instances, and would affectionately beseech our brethren, if any of them may think it meet still to defend their principles, to go upon something of the same plan, and favour us with one connected view of them, without much regard to personalities in the af- fair. If Pedo-baptism after all be really scriptural, (a thing which we rnust say, however, we have no pre- sent grounds for supposing), we are convinced that it can be made clear, and the grievous and wearisome con- troversy brought to a happy termination, only by such means. Let us now examine, by the unerring standard of truth, the principles at which we have hinted. We have given it as our decided opinion, that the most consistent view in which we think Pedo-baptist principles can be held, is that of national Christianity. It is thus that Dr Taylor treats the subject, and it must be confessed, that he is on this account pretty consistent with himself, though by no means is he consistent with the truth. For while that single saying of the faithful and true Witness has a place in our Bibles, *' My kingdom is not of this world," we defy all who were ever born of * See Chap. VII. Sect.l. where these passages, amongst others qf a similar nature, are explained. 176 DISTINGUISHING MARKS OK women, to prove that Christianity established by hu- man laws is scriptural. But what kind (^ subterfuge is this, to which our brethren have betaken themselves, since because they dare not from principle maintain the validity of religi- ous establishments, to limit the duration of children's in- terest in the covenant, if so be they ever had such an interest ? and what are the grounds on which they propose to proceed ? It is, as we have before noticed, from the circumstance of the rejection of Ishmael and Esau, and the unbelieving Israelites in the wilderness. If these cases however are the only grounds upon which such a sentiment has been formed, we trust that a can- did attention to what we have already said on this sub- ject, (Chap. II. Sect. 1.) will shew that it is founded entirely on mistake. From what we have there said, our readers will perceive, we trust, that these instances do not give the smallest countenance to such a theory. They will perceive, that the cases of Ishmael and Esau can make nothing for the point ; they having been se- parated from the seed to which the promise belonged, not so much on account of the want of faith, as on ac- count of the want of a joint interest with that seed. And, moreover, as the Lord had also purposes with them of a very special and important nature, so, for the accomplishment of these alone, had there been no other reason, it was necessary that such a separation should have taken place. But, that they do not afford even the shadow of a reason for the scheme here proposed, is evident to me, first, from the circumstance of Ishmael being declared, and that at a considerable period previ- ous to the alleged cause of his rejection, that he should, not be heir nvith the child "who should be born ,- and second- ly, from the fate of Esau, in this particular, being de- FORMER AND LATTER DISPENSATIONS. 177 termined before he was born, or had yet done good or tvit^ as the Scripture expresseth it. And as to the case of the unbelieving Israelites, we consider it equally inap- |flicable as the other ; but without saying any thing further Upon it here^ we would refer wholly to what we have said in the place above alluded to. Before we dismiss this subject entirely, however, we shall say a few things respecting it in a general way. We suppose then, that our brethreuj who are for tnaintaining the scheme of cutting off such children from the church as give no evidence of their faith^ will not scruple to re-admit them upon a subsequent profes- sion. Will it not puzzle them however to demonstrate, that yjis was the tenOr lipon which the separation of Ishma^l and Esau proceeded ? Yea, is it not clear, on the contrary, that the Scriptures represent their separa- tion as having taken place, in order to effect a particu- lar purpose, and as having been all at once Irreversible and final ? They we,rc separated, never again to be join- ed with the children of the promise, neither they, nor their descendents as a body, in all their successive gene- rations. Upon the same tenqr went also the denuncia- tion against the Israelites in the wilderness. It was likewise irreversible and final. There was no place given for repentance ; so that, of all the thousands in Is- rael, none entered the promised land, save Caleb and Joshua, the only exceptions against Whom the threaten- ing had not gone forth. It is evident too, that the laws instituted i>y Moses respecting disobedient and • froward children, partook more of thd nature of civil legislation, than of church discipline. It is a principle inseparable from the latter, tliat excommunication is never to be had recourse to in tl\e first instance, nor even at all, till the culprit has Z 178 msTiK^uisttiiirG marks of been otherwise dealt witli ; and it is only after he has stood out against all salutary means of reformation, that he is to be cast oiit and aedbanted a heathen man and a publican. And even-iaftar all, should he manifest sigjji^ of repeiataiice in iany subsequent period, the ,brethT«!\ afe bound to receive hijn with cordial affection, confii m- mg their love to such a soul, lest he should be swallow- ed up of over much sorrow *. Nor further than sim-t pie excommunieation does this power permit them to go. Though the subject whom they separate may speak all m.anner of evil against them, and persecute them •with all the fury of a yet unconverted Saul, they are notwithstanding to bear it patiently, and not to touch a hair of his head to do him hurt, though they should h-ive it in their poweri They are on no account, as the disciples of Christ, and, acting in his service,, either in- dividually or in their collective capacity, to shed the blood of any 6ne. How different in all these respects, however, was the former dispensation ? It was not mere exclusion, but positive death^ which was the penalty an- nexed to many crimes. Israel was not only a clifurch, but a nation distinct by i^ejf ; and as Jehovah was their king and head, so he gave theni laws by which their conduct might be regulated, even in their hational capa- city. Church and state, under that dispensation, were blended j and as it is impossible to maintain the peace and order of a state without corporeal punishments, so there were Jaws enacting these, that those who wrought confusion in Israjel might be set forth as examples of warning to their brethren. But never, except by the apostolic rod^ which was peculiar to the apostolic charac- ter and age, were there any corporeal punishments in- flicted in the new dispensation. And it Is w'orthy of remark, that what punishm€nts they did inflict, wev<^ * 2 Cor. ii. 7. FORMER AN© LATTER DISPENSATIONS. ITli 5-iot of an ordinary, but of an extraordinary and miracu- lous nature. Had they been of the former description, and to have been employed in succeeding ages, this would have been interfering with the magisterial power, and never could have been practised, save upon Old Testament principles, by the umon of church. and state, ivhich would have completely contradicted that saying of our blessed Lord, that his kingdom is fioi of tHjs •uwrld. k The only other distinction between the two dispensa-:- tions we hs^-e yet to notice, is that respecting the ordi^ fiances. Concerning these, considerable opposition has existed between Baptists and Pedo-baptists j the first alleging the ordinances of the former dispensation to be wholly of a carnal nature, as tbose of the latter to be entirely spiritual. While the second, oh tTie contrary, maintain, and I confess with a good deal of apparent reason, that there appears as much carnality, if you ■take the ordinances simply by themselves, in the latter dispensation as in the former. *]?t''is urged, and for my part* I conceive conclusively, that there appears to be as little spirituality in the W^tfi^ act of immersing in wa- ter, the only mode Baptists aver the ordinance can be attended to,- as in the administration of circumcision. Without therefore pretcjnding to be arbiters in this affair, we would simply give our own views of the sub- ject. Considering the admirable unity of design which pervades the whole of divine revelation, we would be far from supposing any of the ordinances, under either dispensation, though they may ftid:eed possess characters peculiar to themselves, not to inculcate the same gene- ral truths, in speal -ng of|^|;he ordinance of circumci- sion, thougni we considered it ^ having a reference to , spme things which were not strictly spiritual, we were however far from excluding splrityal significations ffom 180 DISTINGmSHING MARKS*6f" it altogether. And the same may ^f said of all the otlicr ordinances under thelaw. The paschal lamb was primarily designed to commemorate the deliverance vouchsafed to Israel, in the preservation of their first- born, when all the first-born of tlie Egyptians were slain by the destroying angel. Bui it pointed to Christ, as a secondary and higher signification, through the stiedding of whose blood deliverance from sin and wrath should be obtained. The laws respecting leanness and uncleanness, v/hile they primarily pointed out the cere- monial qualifications of such as could be admitted into the worship of God, signified in a spiritual sense that moral purity, which is the delight of Him who desireth truth in the inward part, and which is expressed in the New Testament by a Worshipping of God in the spirit. The sins of ignorance fitly pointed out those daily short- comings of the glory of God, with which his most spi- ritual and devoted servants were chargeable, and the ne- cessity of continually having recourse, for pardon and forgiveness, to the blood of Jesus, who is the Media- tor of the new covenant, the advocate within the veil, exalted as a Prince and a Saviour to give repentance unto his people, even the remission of their sins. The brazen serpent erected in the wilderness, evidently for a purpose, which suited the local situation of Israel at the time ; though its existence was to be but temporary, it yet had a higher meaning, and pointed to the elevation of Christ upon his cross, by faith in whose blood men should be delivered, from a worse evil than the sting of the fiery-flying serpents, even from sin and its infinite consequences, as an infinite evil, committed against such an infinitely great, holy, and munificent Being as God IS. TK16 law of the lepers too, and in one word, all the other institutions which can be named, while they had evidently a first or primary signification, had also a se- FORMER AND LATTER DISPENSATIONS. 18^ rondary or higfo^E purport, in which consbted their very life and essetice, and without attention to which they can never be rightly understood. { With respect to the ordinances of the New Tesi|a- ment, it must be confessed they are both fewer in num- ber, and vastly more simple than those of the Old. Concerning the mere outward observance of them how- ever, there can be little or no difference between the one. arid the Qt)ier. The v:ater used in baptism is but wa-- ter*still> and the ceremony either of immersing or sprin- kling, has nothing spiritual in it, further than, the sub- jects attending to it really extend their ideas beyond the merely sensible objects, to those spiritual and heavenly realities, which it is impossible- can be the objects ot sense. The hrend and lui/ie in the ordinance of thfe sup- per too, and the bodily exercise of receiving them, have nothing spiritual in themselves, nor differ in the least, except in the imagination of those who adiTiit the wild (doctrine of transubstantiation, from bread and wine eaten and drunken on any other occasion. It is only the mind which reflects on the grand design of its insti- tution, and which sees through these sensible objects the ^ody and blood of its dying Saviour, that gives any title to the idea of spirituality in the smallest. These ordinances may be attended to, as, alas ! we have too much reason for supposing that they actually are, and that in an unexceptionable and scriptural manner, while there is no proper or scriptural idea of their significa- tion and import pr^^ent to the mind. Though the or- dinances of the New Testament are alleged to be spiri- tual, as those of the Old carnaij yet the one does not se- cure spirituality in the observer more than the othiCi. The allegation, indeed, we consider to be entirely fiiLc, No where does it appear to have any foundation eitliei- jn Scripture or reason. As to their mere outward oh- 182 DISTINGUISHING MARKS OF servance, all the ordinances appear to be on a level, and. there were none of then) destitute of a spiritual im- port, when the mind reflecting w?is truly under the in- fluence of spiritual impressions. The only difference between |;he one class of ordi»- nances and the other therefore, 4 cj:;^nfess mygelf able tfi perceive, is simply the followitig. Those of the Old Test,ament, while they had a spiritual and. heaypnly im- port, referred also to something which wa^., temporal and earthly. But those of the New, have only ofie kind of reference, and tljis being spiritjj^l in it^ nature, so the Qverlooking of this distinction, has no doiibt led to all the mistakes which have been ppmmitted on this subject. It ought to.be remai-ked too, that. it is only the objects of the reference or things signified^ and not those which are sensible, in which the spirituality of these ordinances consists. We mentioned pauc'ttij and simjjllcity as being distin- guishing charapteristics between the Old and New Tes- tament ordinances. The former dispensation was bur- dened with an innumerable train of ordinances j this, properly speaking, has but two only. Nor is the sim- plicity of these le^s to be admired, than their fJaucity of number. Th^re is but one elernent ijse4 in baptism. In the ordinaujce of the ^pper there are,:'two employed. Nor are the things signified by them either numerous or hard to be understood. Like circumcision, baptism is an initiatory ordinance ; and as, in the New Testa- ment, we have no example of its bfing administered to any who did. not profess faith in the Saviour, we hence infer that it ought always to be joined with believing j and that one of its principal designs is, to afl'ord an op- portunity to the newly converted, to declare publicly their persuasion of the truths of which they have re- cently come to the knowledge. Thus whilft baptism, FORIyIER AND,XATTER DISPENSATIONS. l83 being an initiating ordinance, and to be attended to but once, would usher the converted, so to speak, into the tellowship of the godly ; the ordinance of the supper, by its frequent repetitiorii, was" designed to represent the nourishnient, the heavenly and spiritual nourishment, which the soul continually requires. As we are thus speaking of ordinances, we shall here make the following remark in regard to them, with which we shall close the chapter. It is a practice very common with many to represent some ordinances of the Ne^v Testament as having come in the room of those of the Old, to which they are supposed to bear some re- semblance ; but with what propriety we are not so very certain. Not that we have any objection to the thing, as running counter with any part of our system, but as it does not appear to be a self-evident truth, and no good reasons have we ever heard assigned for it, it is hence the' least thing we can do, to inquire into a matter of this kind for ourselves. Baptism is said to ha^e come in the room of circum- cision, and our Lord's supper in that of the passo- ver. But if it be examined into, it will perhaps be found,- that the analogy between circumcision, as it was practised among the Israelites, and baptism, as practi-< sed by the apostles and first Christians, is exceedingly faint, consisting in but one point of agreement, that is to say, in being dispensed but once to the individual, in which respect it cannot be denied that it was in both initiatory. In regard to' the other, that Christ is sty- led oijr passover who was slain for us, is a truth which none can question j but that he is so styled in relation to the ordinance of the supper, and that this ordinance was instituted with a view to' Substitute the other, is a very different point. The passover was appointed v.lion tl;i re was a certain primary object to be obtain- IS-i DlStliNGUISHING MARKS, Sec. ed by it ; but only in a secondary, though it must be Jillowed, higher sense, it pointed to the Saviour. But to. what else did the daily sacrifice, and all the oblations which they offered from year to year, on the great day of atonement, allude ? To say then that the Lord's -tipper is a substitute for the passover, merely because that ordinance, in its seeondary signification, had a refew vence to Christ's death, and because this was instituted at the last passover Christ ate with his disciples, would it not be equally as correct to say, that it is a substi- flUe for the daily sacrifices, and particularly for that whicli was offered on the great day of atonement, n'hich all terminated, properly speaking, at the same time ? The fact however seems plainly to be, that each h.ad a particular end of its own to serve, and was ac- cordingly instituted for this particular purpose, without any idea of the one resuming its place, and the other stepping in to make up the deficiency. The ordinance of the supper is represented in Scripture neither as a sacrament^ whereby allegiance is supposed to be sworn to the Saviour, nor y6t as a sttbstitute in the place of the passover, or any other institution under the law j but simply as a commemoration of the great event of (.Christ's pouring out his soul unto death, and, in a spi- ritual sense, giving his body to be meat, and his blood to be drink for the souls of his people. We come now to the sixth thing proposed, which was to wind up our arguments, with a view, if possi- ble, to bring the subject of dispute between Baptists and Pedo-baptists to an issue. This will accordingly be the subject of our next chapter.' CHAPTER k CONTAINING PARTICULAR REASONINGS WITH THE PEDO- BAPTISTS, AND UNDENIABLE qDNCLUSIONS FROM THK FOREGOING ILLUSTRATIONS. xxs o'ar object in the chapter upon which we are en^ tering will be, as far as in us lies, to bring the subject of dispute between Baptists and Pedo-baptists to a ter- mination, it will be necessary, in the first place, briefly to advert to the diiFerent views, even among Pedo-bap- tists, in regard to this subject. Though most of them hold their principles on the grounds of the Abrahamic coven:ant, yet this is not the case witji all. There are other considerations at least which many of them blend with these, and which together, in tlieir estimation, af- ford authority quite suflicient for the baptizing of their infaiilts. We h^/ve heard many reasop, not only upon the principle that the promise is to believers and their chil- dreip, but upc^n the principle of tljeir having conveyed to tiheir childi'en a depraved and ,|polluted nature ; and that therefore it is their duty, not only to profess faith in the merits of the Saviour fcir themselves, but for thsir children also, whom they de dicate to him by bap- ti< im, praying, that as they have been the means of con- v eying to them t/teir corrupt natitl-e, so he may be gra- Cjiously pleased to deliver them frbm its direful conse* f|)icnces, by washing and purifyipg them according to A a 18(S JARTICULAR REASOKINGS the merits of His blood. And here it is to be obser- ved, that it is not so much divine authority, as the slip- posed propriety of the thing, upon which these go. There are others, however, who from viewing the sub- ject diflerentlj, represent the divine authority for it, as being all in all. These are such as hold it upon the ground of the Abrahamic covenant. The first thing they do, is to mal;e out this covenant to be the cove- nant of grace ; and then finding that God made it not only with Abraham, but with his seed, a part of which is Gentile believere, they henCe infer that their seed also is in this connected with themselves. The manner in which they reason' concerning this matter, is as fol- lows. If, under the former dispensation, childreft were circumcised in consequence of their connection witk be- lieving Abraham, we hhow that now, under the gos^eL the blessing of Abraham is Come upon the Gentiles , and therefore, whosoever among them believe, have a: right to baptism for their children, the same as belie- ving Abraham had a right to circumcision for his. Nay, further, the covenant, they say, is the covenant of grace, and was made, not only with Abraham personally, but with his seed likewise j and therefore his seed, being positively parties in the covenant, ha\'e an indisputable right to the administration of its token. There are others again, who endeavour to support the propriety of infant bsptism, though it must be owned in conjunc- tion with the above, from the circumstance oi fajfiilic; and households being jsaentioned as baptized in the New Testament. Though these different paints be completely distinct In themselves, we doinot mean to say that each has its- respective abettors, and that we are hence to look 3?br Pedo-baptists only of the first, or second, or third de- scription. Oh the contrary, the whole of the above WITH THE PED6-BAPTISTS. 187 sentiments, so far as we know, are held indiscrimi- nately by most. And how often does it happen, that, in arguing, when they are beat out of one of them, they will betake themselves to either or both of the other. We mention them however as distinct topics, which in reality they are, and under which may be comprehended the most of the arguments which have been brought in support of infant-baptism. According to this plan, we shall therefore prosecute our subject. 1 . First then let us attend to the argument for Pedo- baptism, drawn from the fact, that we convey to our children a depraved and polluted nature. It may be observed, that the whole of this argument proceeds ra- ther in the plaintive strain, or in what logicians term a petitio jprincipii^ than in going in quest of proof. It rea- sons ^rather upon the propriety of the thing, than at- tempts to bring, thus saith the Lord, for the practice it urges. And upon this ground we must therefore take it up. I own that there is something exceedingly soothing, and at the same time plausible, in the topic we are go- ing to consider. But as all that can be reasonably look- ed for, can be obtained independently of baptism, and above all, as the practice here objected to is calculated in its nature, not only to give the most false represen- tation of that ordinance, but of the spiritual nature of Christ's kingdom in general ; so we must proceed in un- folding these evils, without suffering our minds to be biassed by collateral considerations, which at best can make nothing at all for the point in support of which they are brought forward. We say, that all that can be reasonably looked for in regard' to our children, can be obtained independently of baptism. That they are conceived in si/i^ and brought. 188 TARTICULAR REASONIKGS forth in iniquityy is a tiuth demonstrable from Scripture, and we are glad when we have it in our power so cor- dially to unite with those who have adopted opinions different from ours ; and what we would here particu- larly request of them is, that they would see to it, that no part of their system shall ever be allowed to clash with such a clearly revealed truth, and a truth more- over, which they themselves acknowledge. Now having acknowledged (themselves being belie- vers) that they convey to their children a depraved and corrupt nature, what do they expect by dedicating them to the Lord by baptism ? That it is the duty of belie- ving parents to pray for their children, none will deny ; and even as soon as born, they may lawfully lay their case before the Lord, particularly beseeching him, that as, through their instrumentality, they not only exist, but exist as depraved and guilty creatures, so, through the instrumentality of the blood of his own dear Son, they may be made partakers of the divine nature. It is their duty to pray, not only that they may be preser- ved in the world, if the will of God be so ; but as no human being, even in the last stages of provocation and of guilt, much less any only entering upon life, is ab- solutely excluded from the hope of the gospel, they may hence pray for all those spiritual blessings to their souls, for which the gospel makes such a rich provision. And what more than this, pray, do our brethren pr-o- pose by baptizing them ? Do they mean to assert, that by the administration of this ordinance, some spiritual blessing or other is i-eally communicated to their chil- dren ? If there be any thing more than simply praying for these spiritual good things, we liope they will be kind enough to specify them ; but if nothing more be intended, why attend to this ordinance more than any other, merely to offer up prayers ? WITH THE PEDO-BAPTISTS. 1H9 But from several considerations it appears, that some spiritual blessings seem really to be expected by our brethren, in attending to this ordinance ; for how often do we hear them urging the capacity of children to re- ceive such blessings ; and withal, quoting the circum- stance every now and then of our Lord taking up chil- dren in his arms, and blessing them ? Does not this ta- citly evince, that they expect something of a similar na- ture to take place in respect to their children in bap- tism ? But as it has been well remarked, it was not all children whom the Saviour thus blessed ; and really till this be shewn, exceptions of this nature prove nothing. And besides, as the Scriptures do not annex a blessing necessarily with the observance of this ordinance, may not a blessing be as reasonably expected, yea, and a great deal more so, in answer to the effectual fervent prayer of the righteous^ than by the attending to any or- dinance, be what it may, particularly if that ordinance is not scriptural ? Wc also hinted, that this practice gives a false repre^ sentation of the ordinance itself, la the conclusion of the immediately preceding chapter, we have shewn that the particular design of it appears to be a public avowal, made by the newly converted, of their conviction of the truths of the Christian doctrine. And in proof of this, we refer to all the cases in the New Testament, where baptism is spoken of, and we are convinced that it will be found that this was the tenor upon which they inva- riably proceeded. If then this was the plan >pon which the apostles and first Christians went, we ask, is it still the same upon which our brethren mean to go, in baptizing their in- fants ? They will perhaps reply, that though it wa^; thus most unquestionably in respect to the newly con- verted themselves, yet along -ivith themselves their house-^ 190 PARTICULAR REASONINGS holds were also baptized^ and it is after their exasjiple that •we mean to walk. That even this, however, is not so decisive as many may suppose, we hope immediately to shew ; but here we shall take them up upon another principle. Can it then be denied, that the baptizing of infants, even though it be upon the faith of their pa- rents, is still giving a false representation of the ordi- nance, if the a4ministration of the ordinance, as may be seen 'in the New Testament, be always connected with a personal profession of faith in the suljjects ? At the very utmost, in this case it would be profession only by proxy. And supposing it once to become general, then indeed you may still have the form of the ordi- nance attended to, but you never in any case could have the spirit of it preserved, uhich consists in a jmblic avowal of truths ivhich ofte believes for himself ; for it would be always the parent who would make the profession, and that by way of substitute for the principal ; but never the principal, I mean in the administration of this ordi- nance, for himself. Thus would we, in fact, divest it pf one of its most beautiful, instructive, and important designs, and substitute in its place what, strictly speak- ing, is but a mere shadow ; for, is it not demonstrative, that among the thousands baptized in infancy, all said to be baptized into the faith, not a tenth part seem ever to know any thing of it, or to be at all concerned about it when they come to years ? Nay, considering that the few who do come to the knowledge of thej:ruth, come to it not oh account of their being baptized, but on aCr count of subsequent instructions with which they have been favoured^ and which were blessed for the very end of causing them to knqw and believe ; considering these things, we say, and along with these, the fact of what the lives of all of them without exception, previous ty ihe period of their conversion, v.'ere, without God, an;l WITH THE t-EriO-BAPTISTS. 191 without Christ, and without hope in the world, and that notwithstanding they were baptized in their infancy — '. considering these things, is it not a pity, we say, that their baptism was not suspended till it could be done in that instructive and significant way, in which it appears ' to have been practised by the apostles of our blessed Lord ; that is to say, when they came newly to the knowledge of the truth ? To baptize in any other situ- ation, whether it be infants, ox persstis ivho have had a long standing Jn the Christian faith, taking the Scripture alone, and not the authority of men for our ruleji^seems equally foreign from the original design of the ordi- nance. We mentioned moreover, that the practice we ai'e here considering, ^iW J" a most false representation of the spiritual nature of Christ'' s kingdom in general. We need hardly repeat that saying of th« faithful and true Wit- ness, in which he testifies to Pilate, that his kingdom is not of this ivorld. As little need we mention, we pre- sume, that description of his subjects, that they are not of the world, even as He was not of the world, these being truths absolutely undeniable. But the question is, what station do our brethren assign to the children whom they baptize ? Are they members of the church, or are they not ? If they should assert the former, de- claring, as we know rnany do, that they are members', then we ask, of what description ? Whether are they spiritual or carnal ? And as we know, from their ouix confession, that they convey to their offspring a depra- ved and polluted nature, and which is indeed the topic we are now discoi^rsing on, we are assured that carnal they must acknowledge them to be. But if this be ad- mitted, (as how can it be denied, but upon the principle of ine.aaity alone ?) then we bclcily aver, that they are 192 rARTlCULAR RtASONINGS not suhjccts of that kingdom, which Christ declares not to be of this world ; for the subjects of this kingdom are not of the world, they are not carnal but spiritual -. find if we thus prove a carnal offspring not to belong to the spiritual kingdom of Christ, we leave our brethren to make it out, if they can, that they are really mem- bers of his spiritual body, his church. Or upon the principle that they are spiritual^ a position which some go even the length to assert, would it be too much to say, that if this really be the case, then no further change is necessary — they are spiritual — they are pass- ed from death unto life. Conversion in their case is absolutely unnecessary. God has inverted his own constitution ; so that it is no longer that which is born of the flesh is flesh, but positively that which is born of tlie flesh is spirit ; and depraved and corrupt men no longer beget children in their own likeness, with incli- tiatious and propensities similar to their own, but in the likeness of (xod, consisting in knowledge, righteousness and true holiness. And what would be the greatest wonder of all this, is, that notwithstanding they would thus bear the image of God at the first, that image would soon change into the likeness of men ; and after such a marvellous retrograde change had been produ- ced, they in their turn, though now in the likeness of man, would beget children in the likeness of God. And so it would go on, from one generation to another, be- ginning fairly and ending foully, the change always in the retrograde form, and always the perfect antipode of the Scripture. But having said enough tlu-oughout the whole of this inquiry to expose this truly inconsistent and unscriptu- ral idea, we shall not insist on it further here, but shall uroceed in our next section to the consideration of the WITH THE PEDO-BAPTISTS. 19S Second argument we noticed, which respects the propri- ety, and even scriptural nature, as it is asserted, of in- fant baptism, drawn from the Abrahamic covenant. SECTION II, Df the argument for Pedo-baptismy draivn from the Abrahamic covenant. _L HIS, it may be remarked, is the grand source whence the practice of infant baptism seems to have arisen. It goes entirely upon the principle of circumcision having been administered to infants under the former dispensa- tion. The only way, of course, in which it can be satis- factorily proved either to be right or wrong, is, by tra- ting the connexion between the two dispensations, in or- der to ascertain whether they resemble each other in this particular point. Tliis, accordingly, has been our principal aim in all that we have hitherto said. With what success therefore we have exposed fallacious rea- soning, must alone be judged of by a candid perusal of all that we have advanced. To bring the argument, however, if possible, to a termination, we would here attend to it in direct form* It is asserted by Pedo-baptists, that the covenant made with Abraham, is the covenant of grace ; that by consequence, it was not liable to change like the old co- venant of Sinai ; that it was made, not only with Abra- ham personally,"but likewise with his seed ; that they were parties in the covenant as well as himself ; and Bb I'Si ARGUMEKT FOR PEDO-BAPTISM, that, as Geutile believers are the seed of Abraham m the spiritual sense, so they have not only a right to the token of the covenant, which they say is baptism, for themselves, but likewise for their children, the same as believing Abraham had a right to circumcision for him- self and children. These are the topics in which we conceive the whole of the argument to consist, and which we shall there- fore attend to in du<; order^ With respect to the Abrahamic covenant's being the covenant of grace, we have already giren our mind fully on this point ; and instead of making any repeti- tions here, we would refer in general to what we have said in the preceding pages. We have noticed that that covenant consisted of a mixed nature ; and that really, according to any idea we have of the covenant of grace, this made with Abraham, cannot, strictly speaking, be considered such and nothing else. The constituent parts of the Abrahamic covenant, wc have seen to be exceedingly dissimilar in their nature, including blessings, as well as subjects, not only of a spii'itual, but of a carnal description ; for which cause we decidedly differ from Pedo-baptists, not only in regard to their views of the covenant, but also in regard to their representation of its subjects. To make out but sue description of siibjects, has been the principal at- tempt of that great champion of their system, Mr Pi- xie ; and I find that my worthy friend, Mr Wardlaw, has thought proper to tread in the same steps. But, in my opinion, all that they have said on the subject, had been completely overturned by what even a brother of their own, I mean the great Dr Owen, published to the world long before either of them existed. The passage I allude to, may be seen in our 87th page, &c. The Doc- tor, though a Pedo-baptist, is not speaking there of bap DRAWN FROM THE' ABRAHAMIC COVEl-TANT. 195 tism, but combating Jewish errors ; and it so happens, whether from the similarity between these, and those into which our brethren have run, that in effecting his pur- pose in regard to the former, he also cuts up the latter, root and branch. We have also shewn that Dr Mac- knight does the same. And from what both these emi- nent divines have clearly proved from the Scriptures of truth, we are firmly, and at the same time rationally convinced, that it never can again be maintained, that Abraham had only one hind of seedj to-iuit the spiritual^ ever recognised in the covenant. It is npt denied, that God established his covenant, not only between himself and Abraham, but likewise between himself and Abraham's seed ; yet that this had^ first, a literal sense, and included all the natural de- scendents of Abraham, in the line of Jacob, let any one read what we have said in the preceding pages, and con- trovert it if he can. But it has been our care, as indeed the subject itself suggests, not to rest in the mere liiQ- ral interpretation of this glorious covenant, but to stretch our minds towards higher objects, as it respects botli blessings and subjects. These more exalted objects are spiritual objects. We fully admit, with all the freedom which even the most strenuous Pedo-baptist can de- mand, that such objects were included, yea, formed a most important part in the Abrahamic covenant. But then we differ from them in this other respect. We maintain that these spiritual blessings are only suited for the spiritual subjects \ and that the spiritual sub- jects are such only as are in the covenant, not merely by a natural connexion with Abraham, that is to say, his seed according to the flesh, ^ut by a spiritual con- nexion, that is, his seed in the spiritual sense, or by be-^ lieving the truth of God. Many v»ho v>'ere connected with him by the first mode, may also kave been con- 196 ^ ARGUMENT FOR PEDO-BAPTISM, nected with him by the second ; and thus there would exist between th^m a double connexion*. They would be the. seed of Abrahann, not only according to the flesh, but his seed by faith. Gentile believers, however, can be his seed only in the latter respect ; and considering that he^ and not themselves, is always styled the father of this spiritual family, the literal interest so hotly con- tended for of the children of Gentile believers in this covenant, seems to be a mere nonentity. What interest, pray, had we ourselves in it, before we believed ? Had we been Jews, born prior to the advent of the Messiah, the period, we conceive, at which all that was carnal in the covenant came to a termination, we might then have pleaded such an interest. But even then it would have been only an interest of a carnal nature j for if we had not been connected with Abraham, otherwise than in a carnal respect, we could have had no title to privileges which were conveyed through a very different channel. As Gentiles, however, previous to the period of our eon- version, what was our situation ? Let Paul answer. *' Aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and stran- gers to the covenants of promise ; yea, without God, and without Christ, and without hope in the world*." This, assuredly, was our situation, as really as it was that of the Ephesians. And it was not till, like them, we had been quickened from our death of trespasses and sins, that we were made to sit in heavenly places in Christ Jesus, and made fellow-citizens of the saints, and of the household of God. But if it was thus with ourselves, what else can it be with our children ? Do they not partake of identically the same nature with ourselves ? And is it not true of them equally as it was of us, that tliey are corrupt, that there is naturally no fear of God before their tjt%i and *■ r.ph. ii. 12. DRAWN FROM THE ABRAHAMIC COVEKA^'T. 197 that therefore they go astray as soon as born, speaking- lies ? If they have not been the subjects of a radical change, of a new birth, or new creation, as the Scrip- tures frequently term it, is it not a palpable fact, that all that they can derive from us can never raise them higher than what we ourselves were ? Children are born to us, not as believers, but as men ; and it is our nature as men, and not our faith as believers of God's vyord, which we convey to them ; or, in other words, which constitutes ^11 the connexion naturally subsisting between them and us. To join them with oursel .-es, therefore, in things spiritual, merely on account of this carnal connexion, seems to me truly the most inconsis- tent thing imaginable — an idea, apparently so absurd and unscriptural, that we may be well assured that it never could have arisen, but from the grossest miscon- ception of the subject on which it is supposed to be founded. This subject is the Abrajiamic covenant j and the mode of reasoning we consider so erroneous, proceeds upon the following principle. This covenant is asserted, without any qualifying consideration, to be the covenant of grace. It is hence indissoluble in its nature, and therefore exists equally under the Christian as under the Jegal dispensation. And that as it was made with Abraham's seed, no less than with himself, a part of which is Gentile believers, it is therefore ima- gined that their natural offspring likewise are included along with themselves, as the natural posterity of Abra- ham unquestionably was under the former dispensation, But such an inference seems to proceed entirely from a misapprehension of the matter. The^rst error seems to be the unqualified assertion respecting the covenant's being made the covenant of grace. This, however, if they would only allow them- selves to reflect, they would soon perceive to be an er- 198 ARGUMENT FOR rEDO-BAFTISM, ror ; for this covenant, I mean the covenant of grace, would not only be indissoluble in its nature, but it would infallibly secure to the inheritance of its blessings all who were within its bonds. That many however were included in the Abrahamic covenant in the literal sense, (for it is indisputable that all his natural descen- dents in the line of Jacob were so), who were never in it in the spiritual, and by consequence were never par- takers of its spiritual blessings, is a fact which it is im- possible to deny. Upon this principle of dilr brethren then, who main- tain in a general and indiscriminating manner, that the Abrahamic covenant is the covenant of grace, and who will by no means allow themselves to take into consi- deration its literal signification, are we here presented with the most strange and heterogeneous mass which can possibly be conceived. We have, in the first place, a spiritual covenant, recognizing as its subjects many who were onli/ carnal. Then we have a covenant, said to be indissoluble in its nature, changing nevertheless, or dissolving every now and then, the connexion sub- sisting between it and its members. We are presented, in short, with the free, sovereign, and unconditional co- venant of grace, in a manner acting perfectly out of character with itself, first declaring that its subjects are not so constituted by hereditary descent, but by the so- \ ereign good will and pleasure of the Almighty alone j then we have it immediately retracting what it had said, and declaring the very reverse ; and, after having got all the natural posterity of Abraham in the line of Ja- cob, and along with them all the natural posterity of Gentile believers thus within its bonds, we hear it in effect telling them, that though it is indeed an indissolu- ble covenant, they must not however place any depen- dence on their positive interest therein for their eteriat DRAWN FROM THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 199 safety ; for it is not those who are actually within the bonds of this indissoluble covenant, but those who are born again, and those only, who shall finally be saved. In nothing less than all these absurdities do our brethren involve themselves, by the hypothesis we have been considering. Their second error seems to be, that of placing them- selves in a manner on a level with Abraham, and vain- ly imagining that, because Abraham and his seed were included in the covenant, so they and their seed are to be so in like manner. This we call a placing of themselves on a level with Abraham. But it ought to be recollected that Abraham was a person, and that by God's own constitution, entirely different from them ; and it will be well for them,^ if they have only a place amongst the children of his family, without supposing that t/uy, as well as he, can be fathers of this covenanted race. The mistake of our brethren seems to be entirely ow- ing to their not admitting the twofold nature of the Abrahamic covenant. And of course, not taking into account the distinction which subsists between them, as being in the covenant only by faith, and the carnal Jews who were in it, no less than such of them as were spi- ritual, by their mere descent from Abraham, it was ex- ceedingly natural for them to do as they have done. But the question comes to be, Is their mode of proce- dure right, or is it wrong ? Is it right in us Gentiles, who are ourselves connected with Abraham in no other way than by faith, along with ourselves to include our children also, and to bring in them for a participation of benefits, to which we ourselves had no manner of right till we believed, and this for no other reason, than mere- ly, because they are ours ? If you should reply that the Jews did so, I cordially acquiesce ; but I ask, upon what ground did they proceed in so doing ? Were they 200 augument for pedo-baptism^ in your express circumstances ? Or did their circum- stances difter from yours ? And if they did, in what did the difference consist ? Answers to all these inte- resting questions, I humbly conceive, I have stated fully in the preceding parts of this work ; but for their more ample elucidation, in a part of our subject which should not be allowed to perish by sterility, we shall here sub- join a few things more. Between the Jews and Gentiles then, there was really a difference, and that of the most conspicuous kind. It consisted in the whole of the former, in the line of Ja- cob, being recognized as the seed of Abraham, and in- . eluded in the covenant, which God gave to him and his seed after him, throughout their generations ; whereas none of the latter are ever reckoned his seed, or regard- ed as members of the covenant at all, till they be- lieve. According to this view, therefore, it is maintained, that Abraham had two kinds of seed, a carnal and a spiritual^ equally included in the covenant. The carnal were all his natural descendents^ all of them without a single exception in the line of Jacob ; the spiritual are all who believe, and who therefore are' spiritual, whe- ther amongst his natural posterity the Jews, or amongst the nations of the Gentiles to the uttermost ends of the earth. As then, under the first class of a covenanted seed^ were comprehended all the natural jDosterity of Abra- ham^ in the line of Jacob ; so when that seed is spoken of as being in the covenant, as is frequently the case in both the Old and New Testament, we are not to marvel if it should be Said that their children, even literally con- sidered, should be so in like manner ; for in fact this was their express situation. And to them apply most aptly the words of Dr Taylor, when speaking of the Gentiles, DRAWN FROM THE AIJRAHAMIC COVENANT. 202 that they were born heirs to it, as to an entailed inheritance. But such language is by no means applicable to us. Here, our children have no part with ourselves, unless the J believe as we do. It was upon this, that our own personal interest in the covenant depended. We were iiot the children of Abraham, nor at all in the covenant^ till we believed ; and how do we think it possible to alter, the nature and constitution of things as it respects them ? Our children, thdugfi they be ours, they are not Abraham's, unless they believe; and short of this,. as Gentiles^ it is impossible they can have any connexion with him. And therefore, to talk as many do, of the children of Gentile believers, and of such children ha- ving a place in the covenant as well as themselves, is the most vague kind of speech imaginable, and what the Scripture never so miich as countenances. Of the Jews indeed, it is said. Acts ii. 39. the promise is to you and to yoiir children ; and again, chap. iii. 25. Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant tvhich God made luith our fathers, &:c. And we are aware that a. great proportion of the Old Testament^ speaking of the same people, runs expressly in the same strain. But the Gentiles, to the best of our recollection, are not so spoken of. Throughout the New Testament, for it is here chiefly we have to go for information on this head* believers are in general reminded only of their own personal connexion with Abraham ; and the most that is said resp'jcting their children is, that' they should train them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord ; no doubt with a view, that by the divine blessing at- tending tlieir instructions, they may come in due time to be also the children of Abraham, by faith in Christ Jesus. Biut as being his children, or seed, or subjects «f the covenant which God mkde with Abraham, in the Cc 'i92 ARGUMENT FOR rr.DO-BAFTISM, state in which they are born, tliey are no where repr sented. It may then be said, by some superficial investiga- tors, if the difference between the Jews and Gentiles be really such as has been stated, the former had manifest- h" the advantage of the latter. To which we reply, no such thing. Abraham's seed amongst the Gentiles, are his seed in the highest and most exalted sense. The}'- are his seed by conversion and the new birth, by faith in Christ Jesus ; they are passed from death unto life ; they ai'e justified^ adopted, sanctified, and tlius prepared for eternal glory. But the Jews were his seed, alid in the covenant, in their collective capacity, only in a lite- ral sense, as the progenitors of the Messiah ; but ihough they were his kinsmen according, to the flesl', and a nation whom the Lord did choose to be his pecu- liarly above all other nations of the earth, yet unless they were in the covenant, and related both to their great progenitor-/ and also to their Messiah, in a higher sense than what flows merely by blood, it would avail them nothing to say within themselves. We are the chiU drcn of the prophets ; ive have Abraham to our father ; salvation Js of the Jews ; and of us sprung the Saviour of the whole earth ; for all this may be true, as literally it was, and yet without this higher connexion they miglit be, as, alas ! we have too much cause to fear many of them, were, eternally lost. Where is then the comparison be- tween the privileges of the seed of Abraham now un- der the gospely and those which his merely literal seed enjoyed under- the former dispensation ? Lo ! they will not bear a .v^ropafison. But let us understand our sticklers. The compari- son they mean to draw is not so much between Gentile believers themselves^ and those of the former dispensa- tion, as between the children of such as are believer.^ DRAWN FROM THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 20'3 HOW under the gospel, and the covenanted Jews in an- cient times. ^,It is here, and here only, they make the contrast, as they know from the avowed principles ol those they are opposing, that yielding the palm in fa- vour of the latter, is readily acknowledged. It is part of the system of their opposite brethren freely to avow, that now, under the gospel, children, merely as such, liave no place in the covenant with Abraham, They consider it as now consisting of an entirely spiritual na- ture ; as recognizing none but such as really are spiri- tual ; and as blessing them nvith all spiritual blessings iu heavenly places in Christ Jesus ; so that, if our brethren wish to reason with us fairly, this is the principle upon which they must take us up. But, will they not be apt to say, we do not admit your principle of withholding from children, the chilr dten of "believers, a place in the covenant ? Children were unquestionably subjects of it under the former dispensation, and we ask, and we ask we know with an absolute silence of Scripture, When they ivers cast eut ? But before there be any triumph allowed, let us seri- ously inquire whether they really were ever in that cove- fiant of which yovi speak. Is not the covenant the co- venant of grace ? To make out the Abrabamic cove- nant to be nothing else than the covenant of grace, we know is the great bulwark of Pedo-baptists. And w-e hope they will not be disposed to relinquish that • sta- tion now. Well then, upon the principle that it ip the covenant of grace, we resume an argument w^e formerly mad-e use of, we lay it down as an undeniable axiom in the divine science, that this covenant, in the first place, 7Jtust infallibly include all the elect of God, and none else ; and then, in the next place, that if inust infallibly secure 204- ARGUMENT FOR PEDO-BAPTISM,- to such the blessings of eternal life, "without the S7nallest pos- sibility of a (i,ouht of its being othernvise, from causes either cn^God^s pari or theirs. Such is the idea we entertain of the covenant of grace. We consider it as embra- cing within its bosom the eternal and irreversible pur- poses of God ; his gifts and callings which are without repentance. The question then comes to be, was it thus with the Abrahamic covenant, as it respected the seed ? To which I promptly answer both that it was, and that it was not. That covenant, paradoxical as some may reckon it, was the covenant of grace, and it was not the covenant of grace. In the sense in which all the na- tions, the Je^vs not excepted, were to be blessed in Abraham, that is to say, with the blessing of justif cap- tion through faith in Jesus Christy as the apostle clearly ,^tates it, it was indisputably the covenant of grace. But in the sense in which all Abraham's natural posterity, in the line of Jacob, were included as within its bonds, evidently for the sake of bringing forth the Messiah, it was not, nor could it be, the covenant of grace. And why so ? Because grace is not hereditary ; it does not run in blood, but entirely in the channel of the free and sovereign pleasure of the Almighty. And here it be- comes us rather silently to adore what we are unequal to comprehend, than to summon to the bar of our shal- low reason, the procedure of Him who must do all things right. Here it is that he takes one of a city, and two of a family, and brings them to Sion, without deigning to give any accouftt of his matters. These things are so palpable, that we are not a little surprised that our brethren, who we are convinced maintain the same doctrines when system is out of the question, should be so inconsistent with themselves as to maintain quite the reverse liere. But as it is not with- out at least an ostensible reason, we must accordingly DRAWN FROM THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 205 examine it, ia order to determine whether it be right or wrons:. We have'' just observed, that the principle of not reckoning children in the covenant now under the Chri- stian dispensation, has been violently opposed, notwith-. standing the irrefragable argument with whicli it is ac- companied, namely, that Christ's kingdom is not' of this, world ; that it is not carnal, jamt spiritual ; and there- fore, in the very nature of the thing, cannot embrace children in its bosom, as subjects thereof, imless it ca*. be said of them that they are spiritual. This, accord- ingly, is precisely the very thing that is done in effect. Both the acrimonious Pirie *, and the more temperate M'^ardlaw, maintain equally that there was but one seed, to-wit the sjufittialy ever recognized in the Abrahamic covenant, which covenant, without any qualification whatever, according to them, is the covenant of grace ; and yet, strange is it to tell, that childre?iy depraved and polluted children, in the very state in w"hich they are born, form one of the most conspicuous parts of this spiritual seed. Thus do they, in effect, maintain on the one hand, the spirituality of children, and that in oppo- sition to the clearest evidence to the contrary ; and on the other, they manifestly overturn all that 'the Scrip- tures can say, respecting the universal depravity of hu- man nature. Now, how indiscreet soever it may be deemed, we will be bold to maintain, that upon tlieir principles the whole of their system necessarily behoves to be new- modelled. Either they must relinquish their present * That this is not an epithet of our own coining, but such as he Assumes to himself, will appear from the last paragraph of his tenth letter to Mr M'Lean ; and the black sentence with which the pas- sage concludes, but too evichcntly demonstra'c. \\':V:\ what propric- 9f\\. was applied. 2C6 ARGUMENT FOR PEEO-BAFTISM, scheme of infant baptism, or to make other parts of their system to tally therewith, they must embrace views of the various doctrines of the gospel, which are directly the opposite of those which they presently hold, and which, by the way, the gospel clearly incul- cates. Nor will this demand, if it is but impartially considered, appear too much. It is merely wishing our brethren to be consistent with themselves. Buc of the propriety or safety of such consistency, we must be free enough to express our doubts ; for a consistency -with themselves here, does not necessarily imply a con- sistency with the truth. On the contrary, it implies the very reverse, and involves in it tiiis most unwarrantable of all hypotheses, that si^stem is to be regarded in jjrefe- rence to truths and that truth is to be sacrijiccd for the sake of system. That this is not saying too much in regard to the pre- sent contest, we shall pledge our all to make it evident. We would lay it down as an incontrovertible maxim tlien, that in the Abraharnic covenant^ all Abrahavi s natu- ral 2^'^steritjj^ even as stich^ in the line of Jacobs ivere posi~ iivelij included in it withcut a single exception. And in this bense we maintain, that it was not, nor could it be the covenant of grace ; for this very good reason, formerly assigned, that grace is net hereditary, pur bretliren, therefore, who maintain the contrary, must do so upon the principle, either that the posterity of Abraham al-: rea^y specified, as such merely, were never In the cove- fiant, or else they must do it upon the principle, that grace is:her€ditartj. Either the one or the other of these is indispensable. And which soever of them they may tliink proper to adopt, wc are confident it would be op- posite to the plain existence of the fact. As it respects the first, words cannot be plainer than those employed in Scripture, confirming the covenant to these descea- BRAVVl^ FROM THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 20T dents of Abraham, in contradistinction to the other branches of^his family. In his own irmlmediate family, expressly is it said, Not ivith Ishnael^ hut ivitli IsaaCy will I establish my covenant*. And in the family of his son Isaac, Jacob was the beloved in this respect, and Esau the not beloved ; and their fate, as to their^ interest in this covenant, as it respected them merely as descen- dents of Abraham, was determined ere they were born, or yet had done good or evil. As Isaac was the alone child of promise in the family of Abraham, so in like manner was Jacob in that of Isaac. The assertion, therefore^ of many Pedo-baptists, particularly Messrs Pirie and Wardlavv, that Ishmael and Esau were exclu- ded from this covenant on account of their behaviour, is the most unfounded that can possibly be conceived, and stands directly opposed to the plain matter of fact., that neither of them were ever in this covenant, as it re- spected the natural descendents of Abraham. It was to Isaac and to Jacob that it was solely restricted, in these two families ; and their brethren, though chil- dren of thci same believing fathers, had no manner of right to it^ neither by birth, nor by any other means, but were, and all their descendents likev.'ise, as entirelv strangers and aliens to it, as the other nations, with v/hom the promised seed were strictly prohibited from, forming any alliances. But in the family of Jacob it was not so, not in any of his descendents, tilt the ad- vent of Christ. His family, though so numerous, and in point of real moral excellence not a whit before the others, had none excluded from it. They were all born heirs of the covenant. And all their descendents as a body, even in the times of the greatest degeneracy, are recognized by God as his people ; are s:tid to be born *- See Gen. xvii. 11), — 21. atid also what we have sa-id on th*t pa«5age in our comtr.ent, p. 4'^. 208 . ARGUMENT FOR PEDO-BAPTISM, to him, Ezek. xvl. 20i. though it be evident thr^t nd other birth is there intended but that of -a natural one, and equally so, that their immediate parents were not believers, but, on the contrary, were a set of the most vile, cruel and superstitious idolaters. Yet because they were Abraham's children, in the line of Jacg^^ and as such were therefore children of the covenant, Jehovah, that his covenant might not be broken, even at the dis- tance of many hundreds of years, still recognized them as his people, notwithstanding all their provocations and their gtiilt ; yea, and continued uniformly to do so, till his Anointed came, for the sake of whose fleshly birth, they seem to have been set apart. We hope therefore from these positive facts, that our brethren will never attempt to establish their system oj the Abrahamic covenants being the covenant of grace, upon the principle that Abraham's natural posterity, in the particular line we have specified, ivere twt in the cove- nant ; for this would be contradicting the most palpa- ble truths. Admitting these truths therefore, as in duty they are bound to do, the only other principle upon xvhich their cause can be defended, is that of grace being hereditarij. This is therefore the next point we must at- tend to ; and, According to the Abrahamic covenant's being with- out any qualifying consideration the covenant of grace, it is surely not too much to say, that it would of course save eternally all who were within its bonds. We have "een that, according to the true scriptural account of this subject, the whole of Abraham's natural posterity, in the line of Jacob, were actually included in this co- venant ; and do not our brethren, supposing that it ex- ists still in the same sense as formerly, maintain, that all the children of believers are now in it in the same manner ? Thus then, according to undeniable scriptural DRAWN FROM THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 209 representation on the one U»nd, and according to what is conceived to be nothing iCss than infallible inference on the other, we have a covenant, maintained to be the covenant of grace, including a whole carnal race ; and the question is, what does this alleged covenant of grace really do with those who are within its bonds ? Does it save them all indiscriminately, or is there a distinction made between those who believe and those who be- lieve not ? And is the preference given decidedly in fa- vour of the former, while the latter are regarded as ha- ving neither part nor lot in the matter ? We know it is undeniable, that the covenant of grace goes upon this last principle ; and therefore, the simple fact that any were included in the Abrahamic covenant who did not believe, (and we know the Scriptures speak of many, for the Jews are always represented as having been a perverse people), is proof perfectly suf- ficient to convince every rational mind, that this cove- ' nant was not the covenant of grace, in the sense in ivhick it really included such. On the contrary, had it been the covenant of grace, such could not have been included. And yet, that such were included in the Abrahamic co- venant, and that sucli necessarily behoved to be inclu- ded in it, according to the purpose of God in investing his Messiah with our nature, we should suppose to be demonstrably proved by what we have already advan- ced throughout this inquiry. And this grand object ha- ving been obtained, we should conceive we have proved with equal clearness, that the same state of things, as it respected a carnal seed, was not any longer to re- main. If it should therefore be asked, what do you make of the Abrahamic covenant no^v ? our answer is. Express- ly what our brethren would wish to make it, that is to Dd lilO ARGUMENT FOR PJtJDO-BAPTISJVT, say, simply the- covenant of grv'e. But this, we conceive, it was not before. It was not the covenant of grace simply^ but along with this, it had another part of a car- nal nature attached to it, which we consider now to be done away. We consider it therefore now to be left purely spiritual, as Chribt "himself declares ; otherwise it could not be the covenant of grace simply, but beho- Ted to be of a mixed nature ; an idea however, with the Scriptures of the New Testament in our hand, we arc- far from admitting. What is then the precise point of difference here ex- isting bistweeu us and our brethren ? Both maintain, in words, that the covenant is the covenant of grace. In this respect therefore we are agreed, but still we differ when we come to speak of its subjects. To make it purely the covenant of grace, without any ad-mixture or alloy therefore, we maintain that its subjects must be such as participate of a gracious principle ; that they must be spiritual ; and that, on this account, children, who we are assured are by nature children of wrath, cannot be considered subjects thereof. We of course consi- der none in the covenant, but such as shall eternally participate of its blessings. But in these respects do our brethren differ from us. True, they have verbal assertions, that none but the spiritual were ever recog- nized in this covenant. But so inconsistent are they with their own avowed principles, that it seems to ap- pear nothing to them, in effect, to deny all that they had formerly maintained, respecting the spirituality of this covenanted seed, in order to give their carnal poste- rity a place in it likewise. And a place, for argument's sake, we shall therefore allow them. But when you have got them thus introduced, you surely cannot speak as formerly, about the spirituality of that seed whicb the covenant alone recognizes. You insisted that your DRAWN FROM THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 21 1 •children, as well as yourselves, should have a place in it ; and a place we have given them. But now you have brought yourselves under the necessity, either to give up that part of your system, in which you main- tain the spirituality of the covenanted seed, which in truth would be giving up the idea of this covenant's being the coyenant of grace entirely ; or you must main- tain, and that in opposition to the clearest Scriptures, that 'your children are spiritual ; otherwise, according even to your own hypothesis, they cari have no place in the covenant. Now, which of them would ye do ? Or would you, for the love of system, dare to do either, liow opposed soever they were to the truth ? Only think what sort of a covenant you would make by the first scheme, when you began to admit it as a principle, that the subjects of it did not necessarily behove to be spiri- tual ; but that children, in the very state in which they are born, with all their depraved propensities and Incli- nations, and without so much as possessing one gracious principle, could be members thereof. You surely can- not say it would be unreasonable to maintain, that upon this principle, if the covenant admits of such latitude in regard to children, it-may surely do the same in regard to men ; for what is corruption and the want of grace more in a man tJian in a child ? Thus then, you would overturn all the doctrines of the gospel, you w'ould open the sluices of wickedness, you would buoy up your fellow-mortals in the most delusive hopes, and by one stroke of your pen, you would in a moment undo all that an infinitely wise God has thought it meet to take thousands of years to perform. But supposing you adopted the other scheme, to- wit, that children are spiritual, as less detrimental, what would be the result ? Would ye not" still ' be opposing the truth of God? Would ye not be, in ef- js 212 ARGUMENT FOR PEDO-BAPTISM, feet saying, that it is by no means the case that hu- man nature is universally depraved, for there is a happy exception in all who are descended of religious parents ? Blessed be their Maker, they are not like others ! Thei/ are horn heirs of the covenant of grace ; and heirs by their conduct they accordingly prove themselves to be. Would not your language be, how soothing is the re- flection, that, this seed of grace, begun to circulate throughout the veins of the parent, shall never be im- peded in its course, or terminate even in a thousand generations ? But, as the covenant which he established with Abraham and his seed is an everlasting covenant ; so we and our seed, being now placed under the same, we exult in the idea that it never can again be dissol- ved, but that all our descendents, as well as ourselves, shall be equally included in it, though they should in- crease and ramify into innumerable branches. Nothing short of all this would be included in the idea, that your children, in consequence of their con- nexion with you, have likewise an interest in this cove- nant. All the descendents of Abraham, in the line of Jacob, had positively such an interest in the covenant which included these ; and this, not merely for one ge- neration or two, but for many, even down to the advent of their Messiah. Their interest in the covenant, in the literal sense, (for in no other sense do we consider them to have been in it as a body), in consequence of their connexion with Abraham, did not resemble a checkered garment ; or in other words, throughout their progres- sive generations, they were not sometimes out^ and sometimes ?'«, according as their immediate progenitors happened to be gracious persons, but they were all in- variably, be they descended of whomsoever they might, interested in the covenant, and were born heirs of it, according to its original constitution. The connexion DRAWN FROM THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 2 IS ran in one straight . line, from Abraham henceforward, including every individual, without any regard to his gracious state, and would not. allow itself to be impe- ded in its progress, from its rise in Abraham, down tO the generation in whom it terminated. Or taking the idea in the spiritual signification, still we find the con- nexion between Abraham and his seed the same. Be- lievers of all nations, those of the Jews not excepted, are 'given to him for seed in this sense. He is the fa- ther, and they are the children ; and between him, and them, and between themselves on this very accounti there exists the closest and most indissoluble union: — A rectilineal kind of connexion, so to speak, and uninter- rupted, and so complete and universal, as to include the Whole of the redeemed. This is the connexion subsist- ing between Abraham and his spiritual children, and between these spiritual members of this spiritual fami- ly ; it is close, endearing, complete, indissoluble. Now, what is there in the Pedo-baptist's scheme that resembles either of these ? Does the alleged connexion between them and their children, go upon principles at all similar ? Not in the smallest. It is even not in them to conceive, evidently for tljeir system's sake, that the case of the Jews really was as we have represented. Happening to converse with one of them lately, who was speaking in very high strains concerning the con- nexion between believers and their seed, as it is termed, I asked him to what extent he considered the connexion to go, 01-, in other words, how many generations it in- cluded ? The question seemed to be new to him, for which cause he endeavoured to evade it ; but I really insisted, though it is averse to my inclination to indulge in controversy, that he ought to consider the matter, for beyond a doubt it entered into the very merits of the subject. Pedo-baptists will find themselves exceed- 214? ARGUMENT FOR PEDO-BAPTISM, inglj mistaken, if they suppose that the connexion be- tween Abraham, and his covenanted seed, even literally considered, was capable of suffering any interruption throughout their successive generations, on account of the ungodly character of some of their descendents ; and yet this must have been the case, if their principle of casting such out of the covenant be true. But it is not true. As to the alleged cases of Ishmael and Esau having been cast out of the covenant^ on account of the wickedness of their conduct, we have, shewn, Chap. II. Sect. 1. that it proceeds entirely on mistake j for the fact positively is, that from the first moment of their existence, they never were in the covenant ; and this being the case, it was impossible that they could be cast out of it. But with those who were included in it, the case was simply this. They were ever and anon all re- garded, even in the most corrupt times, as a covenanted people, a people whom the Lord had chosen in prefe- rence to all others, beyond a doubt for this particular purpose, that in process of time all the earth should be blessed in the seed of Abraham, namely Christy whom they should be the instruments of bringing into the world. This appears to have been the reason why A- ' braham's natural descendents, in a certain line, as a whole, were ever recognized by God as his people. But his acknowledgment of them in this sense, was not lia- ble to continual interruptions, or to any thing analo- gous to what is alleged in the cases of Ishmael and Esau. Having once established his covenant with Abra- ham, in the line of Isaac and Jacob, evidently for the purpose of investing his Messiah with the human na- ture, there were no chasms, no interruptions ever suffer- ed to take place ; but it proceeded in one rectilineal course, excepting none of the descendents of Jacob, for a space of nearly two thousand years. DRAWN FROM THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 215 But upon the supposition of Pedo-baptists, that Ish- macl and Esau were in the covenant, and were cast out on account of their wickedness and unbelief, we might surely expect to find something similar in the subse- quent history of that people. If we have instances of two, acting in such a manner as to render their exclu- sion from the covenant necessary, so very recently from its commencement, we riiay surely expect to meet with many more of a similar nature, in after times. But this is so far fronS being the case, that we have in the very next generation, several characters no less than infamous, some of them giiilty even of incest, as Reu- ben and Judah ; some of murder, as Simeon and Levi, in the case of the Shechemites ; and the whole of them, Benjamin excepted, conspiring vc^ith cruel hatred against the innpcent Joseph ; and yet there were none of them excluded from the covenant. Nor does any thing simi- lar to what is here insinuated, or to what took place in regard to Ishmael and Esau, at all appear in any of their subsequent history. The case of the Israelites in the wilderness, is not in the least similar. Though they could not enter Canaan themselves, their children how- ever entered it. But with the descendents of Ishmael and Esau it was not so. These parents, having no por- tion among the promised seed themselves, begat a pos- terity which never to the latest generation had any joint interest with that seed, nor could ever come in for a participation of its blessings, as the children of the unbelieving Israelites in the wilderness naturally did. In regard to the one, they were as a body for ever se- parated frpm having any interest with the pronaised seed ; whereas, in regard to the other, as a body they were retained, and the children, notwithstanding the punishments occasionally inflicted upon the parents, suc- ceeded throughout their generations still te be regarded 216 ARGUMENT FOR PEDO-BAPTISM, as the covenanted seed, without any interruption in con- sequence of the disobedience of the parents. Indeed, as it respected their actual interest in the covenant, the question was not whether they were descended imme- diately of believing or unbelieving parents, but whether were they the seed of Abraham in the line of Jacobs and to what tribe did tliey belong ? And if they could only make out their relation to any one of the twehc tribes, their interest in the covenant, as God's peculiar people, (we mean in the literal sense' only), was unde- niable upon this ground alone, independently it should seem of any other consideration whatsoever. It was not because that either they, or their immediate proge- nitors, were spiritual, but because they were Abraham*s literal seed, in that particular line to whom the promise was made, that they had a place in the covenant. And this seems to have been the precise principle upon which Jehovah acknowledged them to be his, as a nation ; for frequently does he complain of them for their want of faith, at th^very time he recognizes them as his peo- ple J proofs of which may be seen in abundance in all the prophets. Noir ought it to be forgotten, that this covenanted seed, in the sense of which we are speaking, were the descendents of but ofie man, and that the •ufhole of his descendents in one particular line, chosen in preference to those of the others, not only before they manifested either faith or obedience, but before they existed. Though Abraham was a believer him- self, therefore, unless faith had been semi-hereditary, if we may be allowed the expression, all his descendents in one parLicnlar line could not have been included with himself, while all those of the others were rejected. Does not this evidently shew then, that the covenant relation of these descendents of Abraham, was not of a spiritual, but of a literal nature ? Besides-, if it had been DRAWN FROM THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 217 of the former, why were Abraham's descendents onlj, and not those of any other person, inchided in the co- venant in the same manner ? Was A.braham the only spiritual person then existing upon the earth ? So far from this, we know it is maintained by Pedo-baptists, tliat all his household who were circumcised ^'Cre belie- vers, at least so far as profession goes ; and considering what a goodly number of them there were, is it not surprising that the descendents of one, to-wit of Abra- ham, should bear such a conspicuous place in this spiri- tual family, as Pedo-baptists exclusively consider it, while those of at least three hundred and eighteen arc hardly ever noticed ? Surely there must be a cause for all this, something entirely d'fFerent from what Pedo- baptists have ever yet assigned. Upon their principle of connecting the children of believers with themselves in the Abrahamic covenant, and maintaining it to be the covenant of grace in the sense in which it includes such, we should expect to see the descendents of Abra- ham's faithful servant, Elier.er, as also those of Job, Jethro, and many others, bearing as conspicnous a place, and as great a proportion in point of number, as those of the one man Abraham. But the tmth of the matter is, this could not be : for it was not with them, even as believers, but with him solely, that the cove- nant was made in respect of his children. And being with only a part, even of his children, and not thd whole, therefore it is that this part is particularly noti- ced, as the apostle Matthew pointedly observes, for no less a space than three times fourteen generations,. Mat. i. 17. Now therefore we resume our question, and we ask, what is it in the Pedo-baptist's scheme that in any re- spect resembles this ? As to the extent of their cHil- Ee 218 ARGUMENT FOR FEDO-BAPTISM, dren's interest in the covenant, there is no resemblance whatever. So far from extending to many generations, it does not even extend to the whole life of the indivi- duals themselves. They are born heirs to it, one part of their system says, while another maintains that they are not, but all must depend upon their future conver- sion. While infants, they are baptized as heirs of God's covenant, and members of his church. But here ac- cordingly it stops ; for when adults, something more is required, and without this something they cannot have a place, neither in church nor covenant, though they were born with an indissoluble right to both. From these considerations, does it not then follow, •that all the noise which has been made respecting the baptizing of infants^ as drawn from the Abrahamic co- venant, has been exceedingly improper ? We may almost affirm, that if our brethren would but impartially re- examine the subject without any regard to system, they will find matters so very different from what they have been accustomed to conceive, that they will be astonish- ed at their own folly. But be this as it may, we must think for ourselves. It is not to one another, but to God, that we are amenable. As no man therefore dare with impunity shut out light when he may see it, so it is to be earnestly desired that Christians would grant to ' one another the free liberty of conscience, that none may be exposed to the temptation of so doing. It is •nly by acting thus, that we can prove ourselves to be genuine disciples of Him, who enjoined it upon his fol- lowers not to aspire to the foolish rank of leaders, but to be contented with the situation of brethren, know- ing that one is our Master, who well deserves the ho- nour, even Christ. In our next section, we shall take up the argument DRAWN FROM THE ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. 219 for Pedo-baptism, drawn from the- example of house- holds being baptized, as mentioned in the New Testa- jnent. SECTION III. Of the argument for Pedo-baptism^ draivti from the baptizing of Households in the New Testament. VvN entering upon this subject, we may remark by the way, that it is long since we have been of opinion that it is impossible arguments drawn from this source, ac- cording to the information afforded us in Scripture, ei- ther for the one side or the other, can be conclusive. We have no objections however to meet our brethren even upon this ground, and to reason with them in a fair and candid manner. We suppose then that it is not upon this ground alone, that any of them rest the authority of their practice ; but that this is had recourse to, merely as a corroboration of what they reckon to be taught in other parts of Scripture. If this be the case, then the doctrine must stand or fall entirely by its own merits ; or at most, all that this can do, is only to render it more probable. Were we to proceed accord- ing to this conjecture, therefore, we should not give this argument so much as a hearing, but should refer entire- ly to what we have said respecting the other points ; for if we have met and fairly overturned the foundatidpi arguments, it is altogether impossible that collateral ones can any longer stand. But though we might avail ourselves of this advantage, an advantage by which we 220 ARGUMENT FOR PEDO-BArXISM,- might also save ourselves a great deal of trouble, yet, lest our brethren should deem it unfair, we shall will- ingly dispense with the one, and endure the other, in order to give our views of this subject fully. And for this purpose, \ye must in the first place inquire into the specific idea to he attached to the luord household in Scrij)' ture. It frequently occurs in the Old Testament, with the evident latitude of including, not merely the children, but servants, and all who were in the family. This was unquestionably the sense of it in that passage wherein it occurs in the book of Job. " And there were born unto him, seven sons and three daughters. His substan'ce was seven thousand sheep, and three thou- sand camels, and five hundred yoke of oxen, and five hundred she-asses, and a very great houseJwld *." Here it would even seem that the term household is used to distinguish the servants which Job had, from his sons and daughters^ mentioned in the preceding verse. But this idea is still more clearly exhibited in that noted passage, in which it first occurs in Scripture, Gen. xviii. 19. where it is said respecting Abraham, " For I know him, that he will command his children and his household after him," &.c. This appears likewise to be its parti- cular signification in Philippians iv. 22. "All the saints salute you, chiefly they that are of Cesar's household.''' But though this be evidently the sense of the term in the passages to which we have alluded, yet I should suppose that in the generality of other passages where It occurs, it rather includes the' children likewise. Now, if we examine the privileges to which house- holds^ in this sense of the expression, had a right, we shall find them to be the following. The feast of the passover was to be observed, without any restriction, b^- * Chap. i. 2, 3. FROM THE BAPTIZING OF HOUSEHOLDS. 221 the whole of a man's household, Exod. xii. 4-. Not merely the children, but even strangers had a right to partake thereof, provided they were circumcised, ver. 48. In this sense likewise was atonement to be made for households, Lev. xvi. 17. According to these principles therefore, would not our brethren, who are for maintaining the propriety of baptizing their children, from the example of households having been baptized in the New Testament, be led much further than they seem to be aware of ? Is it not a principle with them to restrict the term wholly to their children ? and do they not by this means inadver- tently give it the very opposite sense which it bears, at least in some passages ? While their system leads them to consider it as including none save their children, lo ! we find it in the Scriptures including all, children ex- cepted. And never do we find it at all employed in their sense, as comprehending only the cliildren^ and not the do- mestics^ but evidently in all those passages where the children are included, the domestics are not excluded. From all this, it would then appear, that the Scriptures represent the very reverse on this head, of what our brethren in effect maintain. For while they would re- present the term as restricted wholly to children, tlic Scriptures on the contrary sometimes employ it as in- cluding all excepting them ; and even v/hen they are in- cluded, never is it with the exception of the rest of the family. From these undeniable facts it will therefore follow, that the example of whole households having been bap- tized, can n6ver be urged as a warrant for baptizing only the children of a family ; for the term is never used in this sense in Scripture. It sometimes includes domestics and not children, but never children and not domestics. When whole households therefore are said 2^2 ARGUMENT FOR PEDO-BAPTISM, to have been baptized, according to the most common and uniform application of the term, we can have no doubt but that servants, as well as children, must have been partakers of that ordinance. But whether there were infants in those households, or whether the house- holds, supposing them to consist either of children or servants, were baptized merely od account of the faith of their respective heads^ are very diffe-rent questions questions indeed which ought to be fairly solved, ere we can be authorized to speak iu the same confident manner which many do on this pointy A solution of them however, is what we shall not attempt in this place, having it in view to take up subjects of this na- ture in the chapter which follows. At present, our principal inquiry respecting households, is the significa- tion of the term, and what must undoubtedly have been the fact in relation to it. If it was never employed in the sense necessarily excluding domestics, whether ser- vants or slaves, but, on the contrary, included them equally with the children of a family ; it is then de- monstrable, that when households are said to have been baptized, all the members of those particular families must have participated alike of that ordinance. And therefore to restrict it, as is universally the case with Pedo-baptists, to one particular order of a family, name- ly to children, is using a freedom with the term, which we are fully persuaded Scripture by no means warrants. What we. would here call the attention of our brethren to therefore, is not whether there were children in those households said to have been baptized in primitive times, but simply to the signification of the term when employed by thesacred writers. And we do insist upon it, that if they never use it in the restricted sense as in- cluding only the children ol a family, but evidently employ it, on all occasions, a? comprehending the very FNOM THE BAPTIZING OK ||OUSEHOLJ0S. 223 meanest servant or slave who might be in it, our bre- thren are entirely wrong, in taking the example of the baptizing ef households as a warrant for baptizing their children only. If it be a warrant at all for any thing of the kind, it would go further than v/e have yet either heard maintained, or seen practised. It would go the length of including all their domestics equally with their children, and of bringuig the former forward equally with the latter, in order to have the name of Christ na- med upon them. If children have a right to the ordi- nance of baptism,_ from the circumstance of whole households being baptized, so have servants, if there be any in the family ; for these were likewise, on eve- ry occasion, reckoned among the members of the house- hold : and every argument which can be produced from such instances, to prove the propriety of baptism to the former, will apply with equal force to prove its propri- ety to ihe latter likewise. These three speCies of arguments having been duly considered, we shall proceed briefly to consider their amount. Under the consideration of the first, we have seen, that all that can be obtained or reasonably looked for by the baptizing of our infants, may be obtained equal- ly without it — that the act of applying water to the body, cannot convey spiritual- grace — and that the not baptizing of infants, is no impediment in the way of be- lieving parents from laying their case before the Lord, and praying for every blessing their sinful and wretch- ed state may really stand in need of. Baptism, as a re- ligious ordinance, to be administered to children, and prayer offered up in their behalf, are certainly two verj different things. The last may be lawful, yea, posi- tively binding, as part of Christian duty in general, ijut the propriety or legality of the first must arise from 224< ARGUMENT FOR PEDO-BAPTIS^^, some other consideration entirelj different from the one here urged. The second argument however might have been ex- pected, a priori^ to have been more conclusive ; but even here, we have seen that, according to the common and indiscriminate interpretation of the Abrahamic co- venant by Pedo-baptists, it would necessarily contradict a. great portion of sacred truth, and overturn many of the doctrines most clearly taught in Scripture, on which account, conclusions drawn from hence for the scheme of infant baptism, never can be admitted. That cove- nant, most undoubtedly, in the sense in which it inclu- ded all the natural descendents of Abraham, in the line of Jacob, was not the covenant of grace ; or, if it was, then they must have been all gracious persons, other- wise they could not be subjects of a gracious covenant. But respecting this point, let the history of that people, as recorded in Scripture, speak for itself. Being necessitated then to explain this covenant, both by a literal and spiritual signification, we find according- ly, that this plan answers all the purposes which the nature of the subject seems to demand, and which can by no means be objected to without involving one's self in the greatest contradictions and absurdities it is possi- ble to conceive. Moreover, as we can render a specific and distinct reason why even a carnal posterity was necessarily in- cluded under the former dispensation, (namely, for the bringing forth of the Messiah), but are unable to con- ceive any such object to be obtained by the retention of them still, we look upon the conclusion to be nc^ost fair- ly drawn, that a carnal posterity has no manner of place in this latter dispensation. Believers themselves, and not the oflfspring propagated by them as men, are the only seed of Abraham whom the covenant now recognizes. FROM THE BAPTIZING OF HOUSEHOLDS. 225 Nor does their connexion with Abraham, a$ believers, necessarily imply the connexion of their children like- wise. Nay, as it is only by faith that they themselves have a^ny relation to Abraham, as the constituted father of the faithful^ it implies the very reverse : it tacitly declares to every child of Adam, that though he be a man, he is not a saint. Yea, more, though the imme- diate descendent of parents who are so, yet as for him- jself he has no connexion with Abraham, unless it could be said of him also that he believes. But if the con- nexion between Abraham and his spiritual children be only thus formed, as we are firmly convinced the Scrip- tures represent no other, it will follow as a matter of course, that the station which Pedo-baptists assign to their children in the Abrahamic cc^/enant, has no exist- ence whatever in the Scriptures of truth. And there- fore, to insist for baptism to them, on the ground that they are in the covenant, or connected with Abraham in any respect, merely because they have been born of religious parents^ is taking a number of, things for granted, which first ought to have been proved, and lay- ing the foundation of a system which we do not hesitate to say, when all considerations are taken ^into account, is the most unscriptural, contradictory, and absurd that can possibly be imagined. And we would seriously ask our brethren, if the children of believers be really connected with Abraham in a spiritual sense, merely on account of their connexion with them, to what length do they consider this connexion to go ? What blessings are specifically obtained by it ? And whether does it se- cure, or even make any thing towards their eternal safe- ty or not ? These, without dispute, are questions high- ly important in themselves ; and the proper solution of them will no doubt lead to more correct views of thi^. subject, than may have been hitherto entertained. Ff 226 ARGUMENT FOR FEDO-BAPTISM, Having thus seen the inconclusive nature of the two first arguments, the imbecility of the third, founded upon the circumstance of household, will be no less ap- parent. Here it is also taken for granted, that the word household always includes only the children of a fa- mily, children in infancy too ; whereas, we have found the sacred w^riters employing it invariably in that sense which includes equally with the childreii, and sometimes, with the exception of them, all the domestic servants, slaves, sojourning strangers, or any others who might be in the house at the time. Besides, it equally takes for granted the grandest point of all. It supposes that the household were baptized merely on ih^ faith of their respective heads — a point which ought to have been fully proved, before a single conclusion was allowed to be drawn from such premises. These things combined therefore, we are led to conclude, that if the circum- titance of households proves any thing, it proves that servants and others connected with the family, no less than children, had a right to baptism on the same grounds with them. But even this it can by no means authorize, unless it could be proved tliat the members of these households were baptized on the faitli of their respective heads ; a circumstance wliich must be previ- ously determined, ere any thing further can be said on this head. We would remark then upon the whole, that neither from one or other of these three species of arguments separately, nor from them all taken together, do we see any thing like the principles of Pedo-baptism taught. On the contrary, even th6 most invulnerable point thereof, the Abrahamic covenant, appearing to contain principles, which in their nature cut up that w hole sys- tem by the very roots, we must hence be all-jwed to ex- press our convictions on this subject, and to give it a FROM THE BAPTIZING OF HOUSEHOLDS. 227 place, in our judgment at least, among those doctrines, which have not the infallible word of God, but human authority alone for their origin and support. We how- ever anathematize none. Let every man be fully per- suaded in his own mind. Blessed be God that it is not to one another, but to Him we are responsible. We have all an undoubted right to think for ourselves ; and should we even think differently from others, still no authority merely human has a right to call us in question ; for this would at once be usurping the rights of conscience, it would be putting an end to all inquiry, it would be destroying the analogy which should subsist between religion and the other works of God, making of rational creatures mere machines, and sapping the very foundation, not to say of one doctrine merely, but of the whole extent of that beautiful religious system taught in the Scriptures. From all which evils, may the Lord ever preserve his own ! CHAPTER MI. AX EXAMINATION OF SEVERAL DETACHED PASSAGES COiMMONLY ADDUCED IN tJUFPORT OF PEDO-BAF- TISM, &C. SECTION I. JdV E remarked in the Introduction, that it ihast al- ways be a source of grief to any person who loves truth, and who wishes truth alone, to prevail, to see even good people supporting what they irriagine to be truth, by improper means ; and that, as on no subject has this method been more abundantly adopted^ than on the one now before us, it is therefore our design to be- stow a little attention upon it, and to assign this parti- cular place for the consideration of the various false glosses, unwarrantable conclusions, and very improper treatment which the abettors of both sides of the ques- tion have reciprocally given each other. We shall therefore in the present section attend to the first point, wbich is a hrief revieiv of the various passages of holy nvrit getierallif brotight fovj-jard in support of Pedo-baptism4 And to preserve some kind of order, we shall endea-» vour to range them inj:o the three following classes. — Class_;^/v/, to contain all those passages in which a con- nexion between believers and their children seem to be spoken of Glass second^ those passages in which they EXAMINATION OF DETACHED PASSAGES, ScC. 229 seem to be distinguished from the children of the un- godly And the third class, those which are rather of a miscellaneous nature, and do not properly come under either of the two foregoing heads. 1 . We accordingly begin with class first i and here, at our entrance, we have to detect that false principle we have so frequently adverted to, that of taking things for granted which should first have been proved, and of quoting them by the Sound rather than by the sense. Though it be allowed on all hands, that the Israelites were indeed a very rebellious, perverse and wicked peoT pie, and very seldom gave evidence that many of them, I mean comparatively, were really under the influence of the truth ; yet when reasoning on the subject of bap- tism, our brethren seem invariably to take for granted, that in all those passages v/here the connexion between the parents and the childrien is spoken of, that it is a connexion between believers and their seed. Now, than this there can be nothing more opposite to tlje truth. Take for example that noted passage, Ezek. xvl. 20. we have already had occasion to quote, and see whether there be any thing like what they assume at all allow- able. The connexion between the people there spoken of, and Jehovah as their God, is unquestionably mani- fest, as is likewise the connexion between them, as the children of God, and of their children as his children. But docs it hence follow, that this was a spiritual con- nexion, or rather that they were at all believers, be- cause such things are recorded of them ? See also what we have said on it, page 163. A number of other passages might here be quotei for the same purpose ^ but instead of loading our pages with mere texts without ideas, we shall rather eudeu- vour to catch- the principle upon which such a conexion is founded, than to transcribe from any Coij/iordance 230 EXAMINATION OF DETACHED PASSAGES, simply the places where it is to be found. When chil- dren, seed, offspring, &cc. are spoken of, we ought al- \\ ays to attend to the connexion of the passages where they occur ; for unquestionably they have not one uni- form meaning only in the sacred Scriptures, but are used both in a literal and in a spiritual sense, even whea applied to men. There seems to be one very evident circumstance pervading the whole Scriptures on this subject, and that is, the connexion between the Israelites and their three great progenitors, Abraharrt^ Isaac, and Jacob ; and this is the connexion much more frequently spoken of, than that of their lineal descent one from another in their successive generations. And it seems rather to have been on account of their being the de- scendents of these three patriarchs, with whom the co- venant v>'as originally formed, that they were recognized as children thereof, than on account of their immediate descent, throughout their successive generations, from be- lieving parents. And what puts this matter beyond all doubt, is, that frequently those original transactions are referred to in the subsequent dealings of God with that people ; whereas, there are but very few instances if any, strictly speaking, wherein the personal virtues of the parent are noticed as the cause of procuring bless- ing to the children. That there is something however like such a connexion, we will not dogmatically deny ; for this seems to be the principle upon which the second commandment, the 17th verse of Psal. ciii. and several other passages run. But we suppose that it is pretty generally agreed, that the good or evil mentioned in audi passages, as conveyed from parent to child, is ra- ther on account of the child, in general, choosing to walk in the paths of the parent, by which it receives the blessing or tliC curse, as the just reward of its own deeds, iMther than as a legacy, so to speak, procured IN SUPPORT OF PEPO-BAPTISM. 231 and left by the parent. The passage concerning the sour grapes, in the px-ophecies of Ezekiel, goes evident- ly upon the same plan. There are a number of other passages liowever, which speak of seed, of children, and of oftspring, 6's-c. evi- dently in a spiritual sense. As, for instance, " All thy children shall be taught of the Lord, and great shall be the peace of thy children. — As for me, this is my cove- nant with them, saith the Lord : My Spirit that is upon thee, and my words which 1 have put in thy moutJi, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the moulh of thy seed^ nor out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the Lord, from henceforth and for ever". — And their seed shall be known among the Gentiles, and their offspring among the people ; all that see them shall ac- knowledge them, that they are the seed which the Lord hath blessed t — For I will pour water upon Him that is thirsty, and floods upon the dry ground : I will pour my Spirit upon thy sced^ and my blessing upon thine offspring. And they shall spring up as among the grass, •as willows by the water courses J, ^c — They, shall not labour in vain, nor bring forth for trouble ; for they are the seed of the blessed of the Lord, and their off- spring with them i^." Now, wh^ the spiritual meaning only is intended, it is altogether unallowable to connect a race merely car- nal, or to reason upon the principle as if the seed, chil- dren, or offspring, were born only by carnal generation. In such passages, seed being used lignralively, it is per- fectly natural to extend tlie metaphq'S and lo apply the expression, thy seed^ and thy seed's seed., &:c. even in a spiritual sense, without positively referring to ihe car- nal issue of a man's body : — for, first, it is no unri&tu- * Isa.liv. 13. Iix.21. \ Ch.lxi.^). % Ch. xliv. :^, .1- \ Cl3.lxv.23. 232 EXAMINATION OF DETACHED PASSAGES, ral straining of the metaphor ; and secondly, it is not at all inconsistent, but on the contrary, is the very method by which even this spiritual progeny is progressively propagated. They are not, in the spiritual sense, more than in the natural, brought into existence all at once. The truth is preserved amongst men from generation to generation, and those who receive it, are represented as being all participants of one and the same nature, and thus forming a genus, seed, or kind, distinct by them- seb/es. Having made these remarks on the subject in gene-, ral, we shall proceed to the consideration of particular passages, in order to be a little more minute. We shall accordingly begin with that famed one, in the second chapter of the Acts, ver. 39. *' The promise is to you, and to your children." And here, without reciting all the keen and acrimo- nious debates which this passage has given rise to, we shall rather attempt explaining it in a sober and rational manner, as the context shall appear to suggest. The persons to whom th^e apostle is addressing him- self, therefore, claim the Jirst attention. They were Jews, the natural seed of Abraham, and part of that covenanted people or nation, whom the Lord had cho- sen in preference to all other nations, for certain rea- sons, to be a peculiar people to himself. But they were unbelieving Jews, ^persons whom the apostle could charge with the murder of the Lord of glory, and who had given their full consent to all that the Scribes and Pharisees. proposed, concerning the imma- culate Jesus, *' crying. Away with him, crucify him, ciucify him ; not this man, but Barabbas : his blood be upon us, and on our children." This being their character, their immediate sitaation was that of persons in a manner giving up the gh^st, i IN SUPPORT OF PEDO-BAPTISM. 233 being almost overwhelmed with black despair. The apostle had boldly charged them with the sin of cruci- fying the Saviour, had demonstrated his resurrection and exaltation as events which had taken place, in spite of all the precautions which had been adopted for their prevention : Therefore^ concludes he, let all the house of Israf^ hionv assuredly^ that Gcd hath made that same Jesus ivhom ye have cruc'tjied^ both Lord and Christ. NoiVy ivhen they heard thisy and reflected on the conse- quences which must thence result from the resurrection and exaltation of one whom they had put to death as a malefactor, they were pricked i/i their heart ; they were afraid lest the awful imprecation of his blood being upon t^em and their children, should now be verified, and therefore, with the greatest emotion, they cried unto Petery and to the rest of the apostles^ Men and brethren^ nffhat shall %ue do ? To which Peter replied, Repent^ and he baptized every one of you^ in the name of the Lord Jesus ^ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is to you and to your children^ and to all that are afar off, as you, by your conduct, have undoubtedly proved yourselves to be, even to as many as fhe Lord our God shall call. The Saviour came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance. Guilty as you are, you are not beyond the reach of his sove- reign power and grace ; for the promise^ or gospel, does not exclude you ; yea, on the contrary, it is a device of infinite Wisdom, adapted to persons in your very situa- tion. Nor are your children or little ones even beyond its reach, though you have done all in your power to render them so ; for these glad tidings are free as the air you breathe, extending to every individual of th« human kind, and to your children of course ; there bffi ing no creature far or near, to whom they shall come, 234; EXAMINATION OF DETACHED PASSAGES, who may warrantably consider himself as excluded fioRv the hope of mercy. ^ Such appears to us to be a fair representation of the genuine spirit and purport of this passage. We con- ceive it as not at all natural, and as a matter exceeding- ly dubious indeed, that the apostle should have intended by the expression of the promise being to those Jews and to their children, the inseparable connexion which should subsist in all ages between believers and their children. The expression, upon this supposition, would imply that they, and their children, were already in the covenant ; an idea however, which, if you take the cove- nant to be the covenant of grace, does not appear at all consistent on the following account. For first, in the apostles' view, their actual interest in this covenant seems to be suspended on their actual faith and repen^ iancsy and on their saving themselvesy ver. 4-0. from that ti}ito%vard generation^ Secondly, all the nations, or those in the text, said to be afar off^ would be in this cove- nant, and that in their national capacity, equally as they : for the promise, if it was originally to Abraham and his seed, was likewise to the nations in general, for aU the nations tvere to be. blessed in him. So that, thirdly, the grand point contended for frorn this passage, name- ly^ the connexion between believers and their seed, as they are called, seems to have no existence ; for unfor- tunately the example they would here produce, does not happen to be an example of believers^ but of unbelie- versy at least at the time the words were addressed to them. The 20th and 21st verses of the third chapter of tbe first epistle general of Peter, constitute another pftssage to which we must here advert, as we know too well that some produce it as an example of the connexiois contended for. The principle' upon which the doctrkif* IN SUPPORT OF PECO-BAPTISM, 235 Is urged from tliis passage, arises from the circumstance of the preservation of Noah's faimilj along with him- self, at the time of the general deluge. And this again^ because baptism is here said to be an antitype of that event. But surely such an important doctrine ought by no means to be assumed from such a superficial view of 'k confessedly difficult text. We shall therefore en- deavour to ascertain its true meaning, before we say a word respecting this subject, either on the one side or on the other. And, Jirst, let us attend to the kind of baptism here spoken of. Secondly^ to the manner in which it can be said to save any ; and. Thirdly^ to the means by which this is eiFected, name- ly, the resurrection of Jesus Christ. 1. As to the first then^ we would remark, that we ' shall exceedingly err if we take baptism in every pas- sage in which it occurs^ and in this perhaps, no less than any, in its literal sense. The apostle himself indeed, seems to guard us against this, by the explanatory clause he immediately subjoins, not the j^^iting away of the filth of the fleshy hut the answer of a good conscience. toward God. By the introduction of this clause, it evi- dently appears, that the apostle did not wish his readers to understand baptism in the common sense of the word, and which consisted in the cleansing or washing awar defilements of the body. It is not this kind of baptism lie intends, but a baptism connected with the maintain- ing, even in the midst of persecutzbn, of a good conscience before God. If we attend to the preceding context, we shall see this remark confirmed in the clearest manner. In the beginning of the chapter, the apostle had been exllorl- ing to the conscientious discharge of mutual duties. A ' 236 EXAMINATION OF DETACHED PASSAGES, the 8th and 9th verses, he enjoins it as a general maxim, that Christians, in their intercourse with one another, are to be sympathizing, tender hearted, and courteous : never rendering evil for evil, nor railing for railing, but contrariwise blessing ; to the end that they might obtain the inheritance to which they were called. He then assured them of the divine protection promised to the righteous, and of the certainty of threatened pu- nishment against the wicked, ver. 12. But ivhoy says he, ver. 13. ivill harm you if ye he followers of that which is good f Good conduct will even disarm your persecu- tors ; for, " when a man's ways please the Lord, the Lord (in general) will make even his enemy to be at peace with him." But, and if ye suffer for righteousness sake, hapyy are ye * ; and be not afraid of their terror, nei- ther be troubled. But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts^ and be ready always to vive an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear. Having a good conscience^ that ivhereas they speak evil of you as evil doers, they may be ashamed that falsely accuse your good conversation in Christ. For it is better, if the will of God be so that ye are to suffer,, that ye suffer for well doing than evil doing.^* 14-, — 17, Above all, to support their minds in this their suffer- ing condition, he brings the previous sufferings of Christ, and the glory which followed, immediately be- fore their view. And having hinted at his resurrection, here termed a quickening by the Spirit, ver. 18, he pro- duces an instance of very ancient date, to confirm all that he had said respecting both the righteous and the wicked. This instance is what happened to Noah and his family on the one hand, and the men of that gene- ration on the other, in the case of the general deluge. And it may be remarked in general, that the wliol? * See Matt. v. 10,.ll, 12.. IN SUPPORT OF PEDO-BAPTISM. 2^3T consisted in the complete preservation of the former^ and total overthrow of the latter. x\s a proof of this general state of the fact, he de- clares, that that disobedient and untoward generation,, who would not hearken to the preaching of Noah at tlie time that God exercised his long-suffering patience toward them while the ark was a preparing, were then if I prison^ or in hell, as a punishment for their disobedi- ence ; while, on the contrary, Noah and his family, amounting only to eight souls ^ were effectually saved by water . Thus far we have proceeded on what seems to be pretty clear and evident grounds ; but what may be the precise meaning of that which follows, there is more room for conjecture, and by consequence doubt. Ta- king the passage in its connexion, however, I should suppose that the baptism spoken of, ver. 21. as the anti- type of the matters above specified in ver. 20,. * and which the apostle here distinguishes from mere ivater baptism^ is the same as that to which our Lord himself referred, when addressing the ambitious disciples, and also when * Ver. 11. The relative « being in the neuter gender, its ante- cedent is by some considered to be uo«t«j, which is likewise neu- ter J but, in our opinion, this does not clear the passage of its dif- ficulty in any respect, like that of considering the circumstances- respecting \oah, specified in the preceding verse, as the antece- dent. And it is manifest that this would be equally grammatical, it being a rule in almost every language, that * when the relative respects a whole sentence, it is pui in the neuter gender.' The sense will therefore be, ii, " To which circumstance," (namely,. that of the preservation of Noah and his family, by . leans of the ark), wfTJTt/Troii. B«?rT<(r^«, " the antitype baptism, doth also now save us, (not that kind of baptism however, which consisteth: in. washing away the filth of the flesh, but that which consisteth m i.he obtaining of the answer of a good conscience toward God),.by tiha resurrection of Jesus Christ." 33 EXArvlIKATION OF DETACHED PASSAGE^, he said, / /lave a baptism to be baptized ivithy a?id how am I straitened til! it be accomplished * ? The baptism to which our Lord refers in these passages, is unquestion- hly sufferings ; and as this is the grand topic the apo- stle is discoursing on here, we do not perceive how it would be in the least straining the point, to restrict its interpretation to this signification alone. And what would incline us the more to do so, is the effect said to be produced by the baptism the apostle is here speak- ing of on the persons to whom he writes. These ef- fects are positively said to be salvation through the re- surrection of Jesus Christ. This is accordingly the se- cond thing to which we were to attend for the illustra- tion of this difficult passage. 2. And our inquiry here must be, in what respects baptism can be said to save any ? Baptism, ta^cen accord- ing to its common acceptation, cannot properly be said either to be the salvation or condemnation of a man. Where it is attended to in faith in the Son of God, in- deed, it must be a duty pleasing in his sight, and such as h€ will own and accept through his merits ; but no where do we find it in Scripture, so far at least as our present recollection serves us, save in this passage, ever represented as the salvation of believers. The very contrary seems to be insinuated, Mark xvi. 16. where it is said. He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved ; but he that believeth mty evidently notwithstanding he should be baptized, shall be damned. But baptism, on the other hand, taken for aifliction, is frequently repre- sented as exceedingly conducive to this important end ; and by a Very chaste metaphor of taking the end for the means, a thing very common in every species of discourse, it may with propriety be said to be the sal- v.ation of the godly. Paul, speaking on this subject^ :* Compare Malt. xx. 22,23. Mar. x. 38, 39. and Luke xu. 30. IN SUPFORT OF PEDO-B APTISM. 239 2 Cor. iv. 17, 18. terms these " afnictions but light and momentary j" and adds, that nevertheless " they work Gilt for us a far.jnore exceeding and eternal weight of glory f" and this again, " While we look, not, at tlie things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen ; for the things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are eternal." Exactly similar therefore to what Paul here says, do we conceive the salvation of which Peter speaks, in the passage under consideration to be. The h&\\Qv'\ngsojour- ners to whom he writes, were called to endure q great fight of affiidioiis. Being Jews, they were therefore ex- posed to persecutions on every hand. Compelled to fiy from the devouring sword in their owil land, they found themselves equally destitute of shelter whithersoever they went. As it was witl^tneir great Master, so like- wise was it with them. The heathen raged ; the peo- ple imagined vain things ; they rose tip with one accord, even to extirpate his blessed name from the earth. As those in Judea effected, as they sirpposed, by His cruci- tlxion, tlie total destruction of the Master ; so those of the nations, stimulated by their example, imagined that by similar means, they would crush his rising fame, and deter every one, through the fear of persecvition, from any longer defending his cause. But the attempt vvas Vain. For while incontrovertible evidence could be ad- duced in proof, of this one subject which the apostle here introduces, iT^mely llie resurrection of the blessed Saviour, persecution, so far from being an impediment in the way of believers, would inx^ariably be the means of accelerating their progress. To us, therefore, and \ve repeat it again, it appears extremely evident, tbst this is precisely what the apostle is representing in the case before us. He had first spoken of the sufferings >o which the believers to whom he wrote, were exp.v- 240 EXAMINATION OF DEtACHED PASSAGES, sed ; then instancing the case of the Saviour himself^ as not only " put to death in the fiesh, but quickened by the Spirit :" — He lastly brings in the example of Noah and the antideluvians, as a general illustration of the important facts on which he was here insisting. The salvation of Noah and his family by water, he represent- ed as a type, the antitype of which was the preserva- tion of believers amid the overwhelming billows of persecution. As the former were saved by means of the ark" being borne up by the mighty flood, so the lat- ter were preserved from sinking into eternal perdition, by being enabled to preserve a conscience void of of- fence, even in the midst of persecution, both towards God and towards inan. Though many of them might actually fall by the handi of their persecutors, still this could have no influence in rendering their eternal state more insecure ; for in all such cases, they were never to consult Uieir own will, but the will of their-heavenly Master, and with meekness to >ay, as they had been taught, " Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto men more than unto God, judge ye *." Thus would their very persecutions, which were lik,^ raging billows, and like baptisms in deep waters, so* far from retarding, rather be the means of securing their salvation. 3. But we were to inquire in the last place, nuJiy it is that this kind of baptism is attended with such blessed effects^ Paul states a general reason why it is so in the passage alluded to, in the ivth chapter of '1 Corinthians. But Peter is more explicit, declaring it to be by the resurreC" tion of Jesus Christ, Pavil speaks only of the exercise of Christians in general, in having their mind called off by affliction from the contemplation of things whicfh are seen and temporal, toward those which are unseen and * Acl? iv. IN SUPPORT OF PEDO-BAPTISM, 2il eternal J but Peter particularizes the precise priaciple upon which Paul's heavenly mindedness can possibly sucr ceed, and shews that it must be from first to last, entirely through the resurrection of the Saviour. The simple fact of his having been raised after having been violently put to death as a transgressor, was such a firm ground of confidence, that the hope of believers can never be lost, that earth and hell in vain combine their force to de- prive, theni of it. Was Noah in reality saved ? Has the Saviour been raised indeed ? Answers to these ques- tions are calculated to dissipate every fear. And the man who has faith in then), is raised above the level of his fellow-men who are yet in unbelief} he is like Noah in the ark. " The floods of ungodly men cannot make him afraid ; for the Lord will send strength from above: He will draw them out of many waters*." For if we believe that Christ died and rose again^ then we are assured that those also who sleep in Christ, God will bring with him ; and that if we suffer with hira^ we shall be also glorified together. Thus signally does the l>a_piism of persecution save through faith in the resurrection of Jesus Christ. And how can it be otherwise ? for if I believe that Jesus died and rose again, then by consequence I must believe that he is the tri/e Messiah. And if this be admitted, thpn I must believe that the whole of his religion is true likewise. But if his religion ]be,^true, and yet, through fear of persecution, I should not dare to avow it, then, in this case, I would have to consider myself its sealing my own condemna- tion ; for does not that religion teach, that whoso- ever will not confess the Saviour before men, him will not he confess before his Father who is in heaven ? * PfaL xvili. 4- io, Hh Sii EXAMINATION OF DETACHED PASSAGES, lu this case too, I could not have the answer of a good conscience toward God. For on account of the abundance of evidence to the truth on the one hand,' and my own infidelity on the other, it would sviife me for' denying the Saviour. And thus by saving myself fi-om the baptism of persecution, I should inevitably expose my- self to a baptism which would be infinitely worse, even tiie wrath and displeasure of Almighty God, in the eternal world. Thus, from the admission of a first principle, I am led on to the admission of a second, and a second leads on to a third, a third to a fourth, and so on, till I am brought either to give up religion altoge- ther as a cunningly devised fable, or else to maintain it with all the firmness of one fully persuaded of its heavenly origin, and that in opposition to all that my fellow-mortals can either say or do unto lue. This last accordingly I do ; having learned from this religion not to fear them who can only kill the body, but him who is able to cast both soul and body into hell fire. And in this object of my choice, I find the resurrection of the blessed Saviour, to be my principal^ my ojilij support, first, by way of evidence^ and then by way of hope. For he arose, not as a private individual, but as a pattern and examplar of the resurrection of his people, testify- ing that by whatever means they should die, there should be hope in their death, and that it is utterly out of the power of earth and hell to deprive them of such ia hope. Such are the views we have ventured to suggest on this difficult passage. And if they should be found to be correct, we 'humbly apprehend that they will tend not a little to remove the difficulties, as well as be t&e means of preventing it from being employed, without good reason, in support of a doubtful theory. But so entirely without foundation do we consider the addu- N J>J SUPPORT OF PEDO-BAPTISM. 24<3 ting of this passage, as a proof of infant baptism^ to be, that we shall particularly consider it, according to its own merits^ indepcSnderitly of the views we have here given. It is insinuated, that because Noah's family were pre- served from the effects of the deluge as well as himself^ and this again being conjoined with the subject of bap- tism, hence arises an argument for the baptism of in- fants. But this conclusion we hold to be most fallaci- ous, for the following reasons. l._The children of Noah were not in their infant state. They had arrived at the years of maturity, had taken to themselves wives, and of course were them- selves accountable, and not their parent, for the conduct they might pursvie, 2. But secondly, it does not appear that they were: really preserved on account ofi'; the faith of their pa-* rent, but, on the contrary, it would rather seem, by the becoming behaviour of two of them shortly after, that they had faith for themselves personally, or at any rate if this was not the case, that they were preserved along with Noah, for certain reasons not explained. 3. Therefore^ thirdly, supposing those reasons to' be really on account of something in the parent, might we not consider them as rather of a nature including only general things, than as specifically connecting a man's posterity, even in the covenant of grace^ along with himself? Thus we read of Elijah, that he could shut and open heaven, that afrhis prayer theJieavens gave no rain for the space of three years and six months, and that again, when he prayed, the heavens were opened, and poured out their rain in abundance. In this man- ner therefore, whole nations might be said to be saved or punished on account of the faith and prayer of Kli- iah ; but it would be certainly straining the point to con- nect them. with him, as it respected their preservation. 24*. EXAMINATION OF IJEtACnED PASSAGES, in the covenant of grace, and equally so to conslgit them, as it respected their punishment, to eternal per- dition. Thus therefore Noah's family might have been connected with himself upon mere general principles j or more particularly perhaps, that through their means the earth might be speedily replenished, and that in the- line of one of them the Messiah might descend. Be- sides, there was no little wisdom displayed in preserving Tnatd than a solitary individual, as by this means more ample testimony would necessarily be furnished for suc- ceeding ages, to establish the truth of such an e^itraordi- nary event. 4'. We must therefore remark, in the fourth place^ that between the tj/jje and the antitype^ according to the common explanation, there appears scarcely the least analogy ; and what is perhaps worse, the passage is still left wholly unexplained, aand involved in all the difficul- ties in which it was found. 5. Hence wc mast observe, in the last place, that un- less it can be better explained than has yet been done, and proved beyond a doubt to be referring to baptism in the literal sense, it never can with propriety be em- ployed by Pedo-baptists in support of their system ; nor even then, unless they can make the type and the anti- type to correspond in that particular point which is the subject of dispute,' namely, the covenant connexion which is said to subsist between believers and their in- fant offspring. Second class of passages. Under this class were to be comprehended those passages which seem to distinguish between the children of believers and unbelievers. A very famed passage of this description is contained in 1 Cor. vii. 14. The apostle, speaking of the duties intunibent upon either believing man or woman, whof Alight be joined, previous to their conversion^ to an un- IN SUrPORT OF PEDO-BAPXrSM. 245 believing partner, proceeds to reason upon the subject thus. First, that they ought not to separate on that ac- count, vet. 12, ly. For.) says he, ver. 14. the unbelieving husband is sanctijied by the luifc^ and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband ; else luere your children un- clean^ but nciu are they holy. Concerning this passage, we would only remark, that while Baptists on the one hand, contend that holiness here^ as applied to children, signifies only their legitima-- cy^ and Pedo-baptists on the other, that it signifies nor- thing less than a federal holiness, a holiness running in blood, descending from parent to child ; we would re- mark, I say, that to us the following view of the late ingenious and judicious Macknight, appears to be the best we have yet seen. For various important reasons given in his fourth preliminary essay, he renders the Greek preposition t^ in this passage, by the English pre- position to ; SO that, according to him, the passage runs thus. For the infidel husband is sanctifed to the nvife^ and the infidel ivife is sanctfied to the husband • otherivise^ cer- tainly., your children "were unclean, whereas^ indeed^ they are holy. His commentary runs thus, ' For the ififidel hus- * band is sanctified, is fitted to remain married to the be- ' lieving ivife, by his affection for her ; and the infidil * luife is sanctified to the believing husband, by her aflFec- * tion for him, otherivise certainly your children nvould be * neglected by you as unclean ; ivhereas indeed they are * clean ; they are the objects of your aiTection and * care.' To the text and commentary thus quoted in the Doc- tor's own words, we insert from him likewise the fol- lowing note. ' Otherwise certainly ycur children are unclean. — Our * translators seem here to have understood the terms * sanctified, unclean, and holy.^ iu a federal sense, which in- 24G EXAMIJ^4.TI0X OF DETACIfED PASSAGES, * tlced is tlie common opinion. But first, it is not trae^ *• in a federal sense, that the, unbelieving party in a mar- " liage is sanctified by the believing party ; for evident. * ly no one hath any right to the blessings of the gos- ' pel covenant, by tlie faith of those to whom they are * married. In the second place, it is as little true, that * the children procreated between believing and unbe- * lie ving parents, become ««c/^fl« by the separation - of * their parents, and clean by their continuing together, * as the apostle asserts, if by unclean we understand ex- * elusion from the covenant, and by clean admission into ' it. For the title which children have to be members ' of the covenant, depends not on their parents living * together, but on the faitii of the believing parent*. I 'therefore think with Eisner, that the words in ^ this' ' verse have neither a federal nor a moral meaning, but * are used in the idiom of the Hebrews, who by sanctl- * jied^ understood what was fitted for a particular use, ' and by unclean what was unfit for use, and therefore * to be cast away. In that sense, the apostle, speaking ' of meat^ says, 1 Tim. iv. 5. // is saticiified (fitted for *" yptir use) lythe ivord oj God and prayer. Ver. 4. Eve- ' ry creature of God fit for food is good, and ficlJnng fit for * fooct ?V to be cast aivay as unclean. The terms in the- *• verse thus understood, afford a rational meaning,, * namely, that when infidels are married to Christians^ »• if they have a strong affection for their Christian '' spouses, they are thereby sanctified to them, they are * But en the faith of the hcUe-ir^fujdit. Such, it appears, was •fhe Doclor's opinion on thT^ subject. But would it not have been better for him to have CApressed himself here, as he had done a, tew lines above, and' fairly to have owned that ' evidently no ' r,-. hath 2-nv right to the ■blessings of the ' gospel covenant,' by ihe faith of rtjiose o/" whom they are born, cqiiaily as 't>y Ihe/faitli o5 Ihose fo wiioio ilicv are : ■ ' IN SUPPORT OF PEDO-BAPTISM. 217 * fitted to continue married to them ; because their' af- ' fection to the Christian party will insure to that party ' the faitliful performance of every duty ; and that if * the marriages of infidels and Christians were to be * dissolved, they would cast away their children as un~ ' clean^ that is, losing their affection for them, tiiey *• would expose them after the barbarous custom of tlie ' Greeks, or at least neglect their education ; but that * by continuing their marriages, their children are 7w^, ' they are preserved as sacred pledges of their mutual ' love, and educated' With care.' Another very noted passage to the same purpose, is that in the xith chapter of the epistle to the Romans, ver. 16. ' For if the jirst fruit be holy^ the luin_p is ais» holy ; atjd if the root be holy, so are the branches. When 1 first heard this passage produced in favour of infant baptism, in consequence of a federal holiness said to subsist between the parent and the child, I confess I was not a little struck at the idea, and the more so, as it differed so much from the notions I had entertained of it, and which I do still entertain, as upon further re- flection I conceive them to be more rational. There were just two principles upon which I used to explain the passage, and which to me still appear to be happily free fi?oni that arbitrary and forced construc- tion I here object 16. The first was that of considering it simply as a figure, intended .to convey a general truth, by means of which the apostle might convey most clearly his design to his readers. The se<:ond was to illustrate it wholly by the context, wherein there is hey mention made of that particular subject for which it is produced ; but, on the contrary, everything to prove, thvt it is only personal faith which can give any a personal it'ierest to tlic blessings in the covenant of erace. 2iS EXAMIKATION OI DETACHED PASSAGES, As a general principle it is true, that a sample taken out of a whole must resemble that whole, and that if a root be holy, so are also the branches. See examples of this truth taught in the following Scriptures, Matt, vii. 16, — 20. and James iii. 11, 12. And that this general truth was consonant to the apo- stle's design in this passage, must appear evident to any one at first view. The subject of which he is here speak- ing, is the rejection of the Jews and reception of the Gen- tiles. These form a contrast in the apostle's account, in several of the preceding verses. But he speaks of an in-gathering, as well as a rejection of that ancient people, and passes several strictures relative to the ef- fect that both were to have upon the Gentiles. *' If the fall of them," says he, " be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles, how much more their fulness ?" ver. 12. This the apo- stle spoke concerning the Gentiles, that he might stir up his brethren the Jews to emulation, and might be the happy means of saving some of them, ver. 13, 1}. U'hen resuming, ver. 15. the same kind of reflection he h9,d thrown out in the 12th, he says, " For if the cast- ing away of them be the reconciling of the world, what ihall the receiving of them be but life from the dead ?" i^fter which follows the passage in question, For if the jirst fruit be Jwly, the lump is also holy ; and if the root he holy^ so arc the branches. From the connexion in which this passage occurs, it would then appear that, by \\\^ first fruits^ we are either to understand converts from among the Gentiles in the early ages of Christianity, or those from among^ Jhe Jevvs at the same period ; or perhaps both ought to be kept in view, and then the first fruit thus ui?derstood, will be answerable on the one hand to the f^Laess of t!;r. IN SUPPORT OF PEDO-BAPTISM. 2i9 -Gentiles, and on the other to the in-gathering of the Jews, which were both to take place in latter times. As for the other figure taken from the vegetable world, the connexion between a root and its branches must be obvious to all. If the root be sound and healthy, the branches will be so in like manner ; but if the root be corrupt, the branches must partake of cor- ruption likewise. In this respect, the one rnust always keep p&ce with the other. The question then comes to be, what is the root, and who are the branches the apostle has particularly ia view by this figurative language ? There are various passages of Scripture which represent Jesus Christ to be the root and offspring of David ; and what he was to David in respect of a root, that certainly he is to the whole of his people. But there is another passage, Jer, xi. 16. in which the same kind of figure is employed, which some suppose to refer to Abraham as the root- Israel and Judah are there represented as " a green olive tree, fair, and of goodly fruit ;" but because of their lewdness, the Lord is said to have kindled a fire, and the branches of it are broken. As Abraham was then the founder of that nation, so he is considered by many in relation to this figure, as the root ; and that it is to him, under the same metaphor, that the apostle alludes in the passage before us. To which interpretation, there can be certainly no objection, provided it be kept in view that Abraham is to be considered as a root in a twofold sense, carnal and spiritual ; and that it is only in the latter, that the figure can be applicable in this passage. For as the believing Gentiles are the princi- pal persons here spoken of, and along with them are connected believing Jews, it is demonstrably evident that Abraham was never connected with either of them in this character, but in the spiritual sense. li" 9,50 EXAMINATION OF DETACHED PASSAGES, According to these interpretations therefore, the sense of the passage must be sufSciently manifest. The Jirst fruit of believing Jews and Gentiles, would i-efer to the full harvest of believers of both classes, which was to take place in latter times. The qualities or characters of the full harvest, here represented by, the expression the lump or mass, would in this respect correspond with . the first fruit ; so that, if the one was holy and devoted to the Lord, like the first fruits under the law, the other would be so in like manner ; and therefore, from this passage, we are taught to think soberly in regard to the latter day glory, and to view it in all respects as corre- sponding with the sample afforded by the first fruits, in which it consisted in the conversion of individuals, by means of a personal conviction of the truth, and not the indiscriminate vocation of whole nations to the assump- tion of a name where there existed nothing of the reali- ty. By this we perceive also what we are to under- stand by the root atid the branches. Being only spiritual matters which are here spoken of, the connexion be- tween the , one and the other must by consequence be understood of this nature only. Whether therefore Abraham or Christ be considered as the root, the mean- ing will be the same ; the root will be spiritual, and the' branches also. Divesting the passage of all figures then, it will amount simply to what is clearly taught in other parts of Scripture, namely, that Abraham is the spiritual father of all who believe, whether Jews .or Gentiles, and that all who believe are spiritual chil- dren, and are therefore in this partakers of the nature and qualities of the parent. Or should any rather pre^ f'cr to consider Christ as the root, still they wiJl find that when the figure is stripped of its metaphorical sig- nification, it will come to one and the same thing. We would therefore ask, in the la^t place, that fronu IN SUPPORT OF PEDO-BAPTISM, 251 the passage thus explained, explained as we conceive without any unnatural, arbitrary, or forced meaning given to the words, wherein does it at all appear to give any countenance to those notions which Pedo-bap- tists deduce from it ? On the contrary, we will be bold to affirm, that it v/ill be impossible for them to find, either in this or in any other part of Scripture, that fe- deral connexion they so vehemently contend for, if by this connexion they intend, as we know they do, the spiritual intei-est of a carnal posterity, in a spiritual co- venant, in consequence of the faith of their parents. Yea, we are certain we are not assuming too high grounds here, when we roundly assert, that before such a point can be proved, they must first get rid of «that undeniable and most clearly inculcated doctrine, the urn-' versal deprav'tty of human nature. Conceiving these to be the principal passages beionp-- ing to the second class^ without spending time in the con- sideration of others of which these may serve as a spe- cimen, we shall rather proceed to the consideration of the third and last class of passages, which were to con- sist of such a general nature, that thfey could not be well reckoned under either of the foregoing. And here we would remark, that because several passages of Scripture speak of certain children as ha- ving been blessed in their early infancy or youth, this is hence urged as a reason why all children, of believers at least, ought to be baptized. The cases generally al- luded to, are Samuel, Jeremiah. John the Baptist, and the children whom our Lord himself took in his arms and blessed, in the presence of the multitude. But :sach instances surely, while they indeed display in a very conspicuous manner the riches of the Saviour's grace, can never be an example for Pedo-baptism, un- \:%i they had been represented with such a yiev.'« The 252 EXAMINATION OF DETACHED PASSAGES, paucity of their number indeed, overturns the argument of itself ; for unless it can be said of all children, or at , least of as many as have the ordinance of baptism ad- ministered to them, that they in like manner are bless- ed and endov/ed with gracious principles, no arguments can be drawn from the one to the other. Besides, it was by no means in the act of attending to this ordi- nance that these children were blessed ; neither do wc read of any of them having been baptized, even after the blessing was conferred. What then is there in these passages that can at all countenance infant baptism ? Much encouragement indeed they afford for Christians to confide in God in behalf of their children ; but it is easy to conceive of this in a general manner, as indeed we are constrained from these passages to do, without considering all our children as therefore spiritual, and heirs of the covenant of grace, in consequence of their connexion with us. The next passage to which we shall attend, is con- tained, 1 Cor. X. 2. jdtid were all baptized unto Moses in the cloudy and In the sea. The chief argument commonly deduced from this text is, that as all the Israelites were baptized into Mo- ses in the cloud, and in the sea, and as they carried their children along with them, they would all be baptized in like manner. Hence arises, it is said, the propriety of Pedo-baptism. Biit concerning this subject, there are two weighty considerations which ought to be taken into account be- fore any sucjh deduction can be allowed. The first is, to ascertain the sense in which Israel v/as baptized into Moses in the cloud^ and in the sea. The second to in- quire whether baptism, as that particular institution en- joined by Christ upon his apostles, "was specifically the same as that, and whether that, in this defined 'sense, IN SUPPORT OF FEDO-BAPTISM^ 253 kvas observed and administered to infants in succeeding generations, till it came to be absorbed in the baptism of Christ as its antitype. In nothing less than these particulars do we consider the merits of this question to consist ; for it is not from the mere sound of the word Inptize in this passage, but from the sense in which it is used, in conjunction with the custom which prevailed in that dispensation, bj which alone the argument, in re- gard to it, is to be decided. In what J'^wj'f then were the Israelites baptized iulu Moses, in the cloud, and in the sea? Or rather, it may be asked as a question more likely to illustrate the other, for what particular purpose does the apostle introduce this subject, and affirm them to have been so ? In the preceding context, the apostle had shewn from his own example, the absolute necessity of an imwearied and constant peirseverance in the paths of righteousness. He .was constrained " to keep under his body, and to bring it into subjection, lest that by any means, after he had preached unto others, lie should himself be a cast away." Such strictures upon his own case, were ilnely calcu- lated for the introduction of the same subject, as it re- garded the Corinthians. But to make it strike with still greater force, he produces the example of the an- cient Israelites, from whose history, both as standing high in the divine favour, being blessed with many- great and distinguished privileges, and as a perverse and rebellious race, on whom he was constrained to pour out his judgments, they might learn the necessity not to trust m any gifts or privileges they might enjoy, while they could wantonly disobey the holy commandmcnte of the Lord, ver. 1,-12. The apostle, in enumerating the privileges of the an- cient Israelites, tacitly represents them to have been 254< EXAMINATION OF DETACHED PASSAGES, very great, and in fact very nearly analogous to those still enjoyed by Christians under the gospel. By means of the pillar of cloud and of fire, they were protected from the fury of their enemies ; and by faith they passed through the Red Sea as on dry ground, which the Egyptians assaying to do, were drowned. They were likewise all baptized unto Moses in the cloud, and in the sea ; and did all eat the same spiritual meat, and did all drink, the same spiritual drink, which we Chri- stians partake of in the ordinance of the supper ; for they ate of the manna in the wilderness as we do of the loaf, both which symbolically represent the true bread \vhich came down from heaven ; " and they drank," as we do of the cup, " that spiritual Rock that foUoWf ed them ; and that Rock was Christ," siys our apostle ; or rather, as his meaning niust be, a typical representa- tion of his blood. Now, these their privileges being then so great, as a p-cneral truth it was applicable to them, as well as to others, that " to whom much, is given, of them the moi'e will be required." The privileges conferred upon the Israelites did not secure them from the displeasure of God in case of disobedience. Hence we read, that " with many of them," though thus highly favoured, " God was not well pleased ; for which cause they were overthrown in the wilderness." What then are we Christians to. learn from the re- hesrsal of these things ? " These things," saith the apostle, "" have become examples to us, to the intent that we should not lust after evil things, jjs they alsq lusted," £vc. And again he adds, ver. li. ':'• No\V all these things happened unto them for ensamples ; and tliey are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come. Wherefore, let him thai thiriketh he standcth, take heed Icsf he fell." ? IN SUPPORT OF PEDO-BAPTISM. 255 Having thus represented what we conceive to be the sense of the passage in general, we shall now endeavour to be a little more particular, in order to discover if possible its true signification, in relation to the subject in hand. And for this purpose we shall consider the various expressions in the order thej occur. The first then is, " Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea." Our fathers. As the Corinthian church was compo- sed chiefly of converts from among the Gentiles, the apostle tould not call the ancient Israelites t/ieir fathers, at least in a literal sense, therefore his meaning must be, either tlaat they were their predecessors in the church of God, or that they were the fathers of the apostle and his brethren, as Jews. Were tinder the cloudy and all passed through the sea. Both these circumstances were the unspeakable privi- lege of that ancient people, as will be seen to the best advantage by considering their deplorable "situation la Egypt, the protection, the pillar of cloud and of fire af- forded them, and their miraculous passage through the sea, which completed their deliverance from that house of bondage. And ivere all baptized unto Aloses in the cloud and in the sea. What may be the precise meaning of the word baptize in this passage, as connected with the cloud and the seat, I own is not very clear. From the account gi- ven of the Israelites in the book of Exodus, it appears that they were exceedingly slow to believe the divine mission of Moses the servant of God,, and probably tliey never fully admitted it, notwithstanding they had ieen many miracles performed by him, till they had experienced the divine power by the cloud protecting tliem from the fury of their enemies, apd by the sea divi- 2JS EXAMINATION OF DETACHED PASSAGES, ding immediately upon Moses stretching his rod over it,- by which a passage was made for their final and safe retreat. Then indeed^ and not till then, do they seem to have had that regard for Moses, which his high cha- racter and office demanded. Upon every former attempt to deliver them, in which he did not succeed in persua- ding Pharaoh to allow them to go, we find them chiding against Moses and Aaron, praying them to desist*; but in this final and successful one, instead of uttering a murmuring word, it is expressly said, that " Israel saw that great work which the Lord did upon the Egyp- tians ; and that the people feared the Lord, and belie- ved the Lord, and his servant Moses f. Thus were they initiated, so to speak, into the belief of Moses, as a person divinely commissioned to be their deliverer and guide. And as the mode of baptism, according to its most prevalent use in the apostle's days, bore such a close analogy to the covering of the Israelites with the cloud, and their going down into the bed of the sea, this analogical agreement is perhaps what the apostle means by the expression, and were all hr.j}tized into Aloses in the cloud and in the sea. At least, if he mean any other thing, we confess ourselves unable to discover it. The next expression is, And did all eat the same spiri- inal meat. The meat here alluded to, undoubtedly is the manna. The apostle calls it spiritual^ I should sup- pose, not because it really was so, but on account of its typical nature, and the origin whence it came. Our Lord indeed assures us, John vi. 32. that the manna which descended from the clouds was not the true bread of heaven, but that it was only in a subordinate sense it could be so called ; with which account we never can suppose the apostle 'as disagreeing. We are therefore under t!.e necessity of explaining the term he employs, * Exod.siv. .1],12. I Vcr.'Jl. IN SUPPORT OF PEDO-BAPTISM;^ 257 as signlfyiag spiritual food only in this secondary sense. And what proves this beyond all dispute, is the use to which it was applied. The manna was sent for the nourishment and preservation of their bodies, which were still mortal ; and it was only in as far as it typi- fied and represented spiritual objects, tHat it could afford spiritual and heavenly nouri£;lmient to their immortal souls *. Again, as they did all eat of the same spiritual meat, so they ivere all joint partakers of the same spiritual drifih. For they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed t/wm, and that Rock was Christ. As we look upon Dr Macknight's notes to be as good an illustration of this passage as can be given, so for the sake of those who may not have access to the orir gin itself, we shall here take the liberty to transcribe them. ^ They drank of the spiritual Rock. — Here,' says he, ' the rock is put for the water that came out of the rock. ' Water was twice brought from a rock by miracles for * the Israelites in the wilderness. Once in Rephidini. * in the wilderness of Sin, which was their eleventh * station after they came out of Egypt, and before thej ^ijcame to Mount Sinai ; consequently it happened in *tne first year of, the Exodns. The history of this * miracle we have, Exod. xvii. The second time water ' was brought from the rock, was at Kadesh, in the ' wilderness of Zin, which was their thirty-third sta- ' tion. This happened in the fortieth year of the Exo- ' dus, soon after the death of Miriam, Numb. xx. 1. *tRi corroboration of the ideas we have given of this passage, we find the apostle John using the word spiritual, in the sense of typical. Rev. XV. 8. M^'b/r^, spiritpnlly (that is, typically) is called So- dom and Egy* *- 258 EXAMINATION OF DETACHED PASSAGES, ' To both places, the name of Meribah was given ; but * the latter was called Meribah KadesJi, to distinguish it ' from Meribah of Rephidim. It is of the miracle per- ' formed in Rephidim which the apostle speaks ; iofhe ' says, the greater part of tliem who drank of the rock, ' wefe cast down'in the wilderness. ^ Roch •which fclloived them. — The rock here, as in the ' former clause, is put for the water from the rock. This ' it seems came forth from it in such abundance as to ' form a brook, which is said^ Deut. ix. 21. to have de^ * scended out of the mounts that is, out of Horeb^ Exod. xvii. ' 5, 6. for before that miracle there was no brook iiv ' these parts. The issuing of the water from the rock, ^iS"Said to have been like a river, Psal. Ixxviii. 16. cv. ' 4'U The truth is, 600,000 men, with their women, * and chil4ren, and their cattle, required a river to sup- * ply them with drink. Accordingly the river froin the ' rock followed them. For as Wall observes, (Crit. * Notes, Vol.1, p. 106.) from Horeb, whibh was' an- * high mountain, there may have been a descent to the * sea ; and the Israelites during the thirty-seven years ' of their journeying from Mount Sinai, may have gone * by those traets of country, in which the water from ' Horeb could follow them, till in the thirty-ninth year ' of the Exodus they came to Ezion Gaber, Num. * xxxiii. 36. which was a part of the Red Sea, a great * way down the Arabian side, where it is supposed the ' waters from Horeb went into the sea. The country ' through which the Israelites journeyed soiong a time, * being vvatered by this river, produced no doubt herb- * age for the cattle of the Israelites, which in this de-* ^ sert must otherwise have perished. But in the foii^- * tieth year of the Exodus, leaving Ezion Gaber to go * into Canaan by the east border of Edom, they no soon- *.er entered the desert of Zin, which is Kadesh, than IN SUPPORT OF PEDO-BAPTISM. 2JD *■ they were a second time distressed for want of wa- ' t«r.' And that Rochsv^as Christ. That is to say, it was a type of Christ, as the grand source whence proceeds all spiritual and heavenly blessings. It would appear froni what the apostle says in this passage, that the Israelites were taught to consider all these things in this light. Having thus given what we conceive to be the sense of the passage, let us next enquire whether it can be employed, with any degree of probability, in support of the system of Pedo-baptists. The word all^ which occurs so frequently in this passage, is the chief point they insist on. Without appearing to be much concern,-- ed about the sense in which baptism is here used, they seem to express themselves with no little emotion con- cernJQg this term, and exultingly szy^ And theywere all baptized, t/oung and oldy infants and adult Sy male and fe- male. Pejrhaps, they might have added, in this enume- ration, since they will come to particulars, in the sense of v.the apostle at least, though not in theirs, and tfieir cattle and their baggage. The writer from whom we have quoted the above remark, goes on to make a great ado concerning ^e 'iSea of the Israelites separating their children from them, at the period of their going to be baptized in the cloud and in the sea ; an idea, we will venture to say, which never needed so much as to enter their minds, and which, notwithstanding that we consider Pedo-baptism to be unfounded in the word of God, we cannot but look upon in the present instance, had it occurred, to haVe been exceeding] v, absurd and cruel. "■ Who could 'have dared,' says he, 'to -have separated the little * children from the camp of Israel, aad said, we are ' now ^o be baptized', and we. can only partake of this f ordinance pvoperly, believing-'in the Lord and his ser- 260 EXAMINATION OF DETACHED PASSAGES, * vant Moses. You infants are incapable of this faith, ' and must therefore be left behind, and be separated ' from the church*.' To which I vvquld simplj replj. Who that understands the matter aitight, would ever consider this as riecessary ? Separate their children in such an important concern as that of which the apo^t^e is speaking ! No ; by no means ! Their children were the most precious part of all their temporal property. They were fleeing from the face of an enemy, and had the prospect of a safe defence, by being taken under the cloud of God, and by walking in the paths he was going to prepare for them in the midst of the sea, both which circumstances the apostle figuratively represents as a'baptism; and must the helpless infant in such a si- tuation be separated from the tender and provident re- gards of the parent ? They were not taught to act thus even witn<'tfieir silver, or their gold, or their cattle j but were to take all these under the cloud, and through the sea, along with themselves : how much more there- fore their children ? — Surely had this passage been but properly understood, it of any never could have been brought in support of a system to which it does not ap- pear in the smallest to refer. Indeed, though it is not our inclination to deal in any prognostication of the kifid, yet here we have no difficulty in saying, that if people' will go to Scripture with their own several pre- possessions, and illustrate those divine oracles by their respective systems, instead of taking, the whole simply as it stands, it 'will be a thousand to one if even in a single point they determine rightly. As to' the author of the above mentioned sentiments, we are unable- fo, conceive how it could liave been otherwise, but that his mind, by those views he entertained, must have, been darkened as to the grand scope and ddsign of tlje pa5= * See Brown's Diet. Perth edit, under the article Baptism. IN SUPPORT OF PEDO-BAPTISM, 261 sajie. The sacred writer is not teachino[ here what he would teach. Not a word respecting infant baptism^ ei- ther directly ofjindirectly, drops on this occasion from the apostle ; add yet, in the hands of this author, he would seem to speak, of nothing else. All the favour- ers of Sion, no doubt, long for her prosperity ; but, ah I the prospect is dark, of gathering airher children into one, unless men act very differently in tHeir investiga- tion of sacred truth than the generality seem to do. There are several other passages referring to childrea, which have been brought forward of late in support of this doctrine, with as little apparent propriety as those we have just considered. They are that class of pas- sages from wliich some contend that children had not only a right to baptism, but are really to be considered as members of the church. Mr Walker of Dublin seems to be the principal person who has given them a kind of form. To his little desultory piece on baptism^ •he has these words for his motto. And they all brought us on our ivny^ with luives and children^ till tve nvere out of the city ; and we kneeled down on the shore and prmj- ed*. His subsequent sentiments sufficiently evince what he meant by this passage. He declares in plain lan- ^age indeed, that, in the apostolic writings, it appears Ito him, that ' the children of those who were members Wf the several churches are considered as bearing that '"relation to the churches, which occasions the apostles ' to address them with exhortations and admonitions, ' such as they never addressed to those whom they did * not consider as disciples.' p. 8. He then descants at considerable length on the 1st and 4th verses of thevith .hapter of the epistle to the Ephesians. We have only to remark, that the drift of his reasoning here is merely \'i corroborate what he had avowed in the words we * Actsxxi.51 262 EXAMINATION OF DETACHED PASSAGES, have quoted. To make the children of whom the apo- stle speaks, first members of the church, and yet in a state of childhood, is his grand object ; and he seems to think his point obtained by endeavouring, in pretty strong language, to represent the impossibility, upon Baptist principles, to attend to the apostolic injunction in this passage. I have just to inform Mr Walker, however, that he is in an egregious mistake, if he sup- pose that this view of the passage is absolutely necessa- ry to the spiritual edification of the soul in speaking from it. No, indeed ; I am one of many, who can bear testimony to the contrary, having heard it lately dis- coursed on in the most edifying manner, without any reference to his view, by my wortliy and judicious pa- stor, Mr Innes. Yea, I will go further : I will not he- sitate to say, that if Mr Innes could have been so inju- dicious as to have urged opinions like Mr Walker's, in connexion with the excellent things he advanced, instead of ixiore strongly impressing the mind with the impor- tance of the subject by such means, their effect wouW rather have resembled the " dead flies in the apotheca^ ry's ointment, which cause it to send forth an un- grateful savour *"." . The very introduction of such doubtfal disputationsjvwould have enervated all that lie had said, and so far from edifying, it>#ould have engen- dered strife. ' ■'^•■• But not to rlest in general assertions, let us (.xamlne tae grounds upon which Mr Walker here proposes to proceed. ' I know,' says he, p. 8. 'the reply uhich *■ some make, that when the apostle, wri tin f^ I'ioi- iii- * stance) to the Ephesian church, give^ that ^xhortnl ' '■ '■ Children, oheu your jiarents in' the Lord,'' &c. he i.i. - * driesses only those adult members of the Ephesian. *^church, whose parents were ' living. ' That -sech ait, * feccks.z:i. IN SUPPORT OF PEDO-EAPTISM. 2G2 * included in the admonition, I readily admit. But when ' I read immediately in the 4th verse, Atid ys^ fathers^ ^provoke not your children to ivrathy but bring them up in * the nurture and admonition of the Lord, — I^ cannot bu^b * think, we are to understand children in a state of child^ * hobd^ under parental discipline and instruction ; and it ' seems to me to be patting a great force upon the pas- * sage', to interpret the same expression in the 1st verse, * in a. sense which excludes those whom i£ evidently is * intended to include in the 4'th verse. In fact, when *■■ that epistle was sent to the Ephesian church, any of the ' parents who complied with the exhortation addressed in * the Jatter verse to them, would necessarily lead their * children to consider the admonition given in the for- ' mer as directed to themselves.' I agree with Mr Walker, that \ve ought scrupolously to a^h^re to it as a general rule, not to explain the word of God by any unnatural or forced interpretation. I can- not aroid thinking, however, that he himself has inad- vertently irun into this very fault by the scheme he pro- poses. When we find the Epistle inscribed *, ** To the saints who are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus," will not Mr Walker's plan of considering as members of this believing f and lioli^ societ}'-, those whom we find in this very epistle, (ch. ii. 1, — 3.) to be the farthest from this character, be incomparably more for- ced than the interpretation he is opposing ? If we are to consider with him the children addressed in ehap. vi. children in non-age, and yet church members, then we are bound to consider them as also included in the in- siorijption, and as possessed of characters which the * Eph.i.l. I Ii is Trifoii^ bclie'vers, in the original, and is so rendered, 1 Tim, iv.- Ii, et iilibi. 264s EXAMINATION OF DETACHED PASSAGES, Scriptures absolutely deny to all, who are born simply after the flesh. Have we not then the best of reasons for still retaining that very interpretation which My Walker considers so faulty ? ' ' ,. u But let us next enquire whether it be so unnatural and forced as he would seem to represent. The apostle is here discoursing of relative duties in general. Ha- ving described the duties of husbands and wives, (ch. v. 22, — 31.) he proceeds to consider those of parents and children, chap. vi. 1, — 4. As the duties the apostle is inculcating, are purely of a relative nature, he passes over those incumbent upon the parents, while as yet there could be. no, return, on the part of the children* He proceeds here, as he does in every other place where the same subjects are treated,^in tlie natural order of ri- sing froni the inferior tp»the superior. Wives are first addressed, then husbands ; children, then parents ; and servants, then masters *. The reason the apostle assigjj^s in the end of verse 1. serves not a little, in my view, to confirm the interpre- tation which has been given of it. " Children, obey your parents in the Lord ; for this righty^ or just. What can be the design of this address to the reason and un- derstanding of these children ? Surely it implies that they were in a situation in which they might be apt tc consider themselves as freed from filial duties. And what situation was this so likely to be, as that of members of a Christian church, while their parents were yet alive, and perhaps unbelievers j v.?hile they, on the con- trary, had received the word in faith, and had been made free born children in the family of God ? Now, as ser- vants were not to act otherwise than on the fair princi> pies of rig/itj he their masters either believers or iinbe- * Compare with this passage. Col. iii. IS. to the Jst ver. of c'l, iv. 1 Fe*. iii. IN SUPPORT OF PEDO-BAPTISM. 265 iievers, 1 Tim. vi. 1,2. so here the apostle shews that the same rule binds children in every condition. The Pharisees indeed had a tradition by which they pretend- ed to grant licenses of this nature * ; but here we clearly perceive that there is no such thing in the churches of Christ., Christian youths are not to spurn at the reve- rence due to their parents, because their parents may not be of their mind in regard to the doctrines of the gospel' ; neither are they to despise such as may be of their mind, and united with them in the same Christian societies. By this precept, believing children are to obey, even their unbelieving parents, in every thing con- sistent with their duty to the Lord, as a matter of right or justice. They are to honour them with obedience, and, if need be, with maintenance, recollecting that this is the only proper return for the maintenance and education which they received from them. And also as it is to them, under God, they owe their very existence, what can be more just and equal than such obedience ? Parents, on the other hand, are next exhorted not to provoke their children to wrath, but to *' bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord." Here children are evidently considered as yet situated under parental correction and instruction ; and their duties of unreserved and cheerful obedience in such a, situation, are taken for granted, and not expressed. But th« apo- stle regulates the duties of the parents^ as they are the only persons here supposed to act, just as he had done those of the children who are supposed to have attained that age pf being capable to act for themselves, ver. 1. He binds it on Christian parents to train up their chil- dren in *' the nurture and admonition of the Lord." That is to say, to instruct them in religious and all other use- ful knowledge, and not even to spare the rod of corrcc- * Comp. Matt, xv, 5,6. wi* Mark vii, 11,— 13. LI 266 EXAMINATION OF DETACHED PASSAGES, tion when necessary. They are to consider them at the first as "ignorant, totally ignorant of God and olivine things, and to adapt their instru<;tions accordingly. And the foibles that are inseparable from' their vain minds, are to be timeously corrected by the chastening rod ; for, as the wise man §ays, '' He that spareth the rod ha- teth the child *.." That fathers may not chastise after their own pleasure however, but for the profit of their children, the apostle in this, and in other passages, lays down the rule how it is to be done. Severity must be tempered with tenderness ; though kept in their proper place, yet must they be encouraged. It will require line upon line, and precept upon precept, here a little and there a little, to furnish their young minds with ideas which will fit them, through the divine blessing, either to be received into the church of God, or qualify them to be useful members of society. But througli the patient use of such means, success need not be de- spaired of ; for we know who hath said, " Train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it." .Upon the whole then, I would now ask, what is there in all these duties incumbent upon parents toward their children, which it is impossible to perform, unless they be considered as church members ? They must be consi- dered as disciples, it is maintained, from their earliest in- fancy ; and none can discharge this bounden duty if, with the Baptists, they refuse to consider them in this character. Nay, it is roundly asserted, that the very foundation of this duty is systematically assailed by Baptist principles f. But we ask, how so ? And what is it that authorizes Mr W. to use such strong lan- guage ? Will it be his concordancial references to the * Prov. xiii.24'. f Mr Walker's Thoughts on Baptism, p. 10, &. 11, IK SUPPORT OF PEDO-BAPTISM. 267 various passages in which the word achnonit'ion occurs ? But if admonition signifies ivarning, as he seems to ad- mit, can none be warned, and even warned from the Lord, without being considered his professed people, and members of his church ? Upon this principle, what should we then make of the mission of the prophet Jonah to the ITinevites, or of the prophetic warnings of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and others, to Moab, Tyre and Sidou, Assyria, Egypt, and the surrounding na- tions ? Could the Lord not commission his servants to warn them, unless they were his professed people ? or rather, more in conformity, it would seem, to the spirit of Mr Walker's remarks, do none stand in ne^d of warn- ing, but such as in word indeed profess his name, but in works deny him ? Such notions in religion as too many have espoused now-a-days, we confess ourselves iitterly at a loss to account for. We own indeed, that we have no objections that chil- dren should be considered as disciples or pupils, if it can add any thing to the success in teaching. them ; but this is a very different thing from regarding them as sphiitual, or at least as members of the church of Christ, which is his spiritual body. The relation be- tween the teacher and the pupil is of a mutual nature, and it is only necessary that such a relation should sub- sist, in order toi "give effect to instructions, of whatever kind they may be. Upon this principle it is, that teachers instruct children at school, and masters their apprentices, in the various branches of their respective (.allings. And it is upon the same principle that the apostle here enjoins Christians to train up their children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord 5 that is to ■y, they are to take this important concern 'into their own hand, as the fittest persons for such a work. Being instructed themselves in the doctrines of the gospel, 268 EXAMINATION OF DETACHED PASSAGED, and in the infallible precepts of gospel morality, they are the only persons of course who can teach them to others. While the church then is represented as the pillar and ground of the truth, by exhibiting the truth to the world, every separate family will enjoy the same privilege in a manner within itself, by the faithful dis- charge of this apostolic injunction. And as the divine blessing is promised to accompany the faithful declara- tion of his word to the world, so we have every reason to expect it in an especial manner here ; and hence it is that churches are mostly furnished with members from ^mongst the families of the gcSdly. Not that they are naturally better than others, but that they have more ^tention bestowed upon them ; and the faithfulness, as well as the goodness of God, bind him to bless the or- dinances or means of his own appointment. The next passage we shall consider, is contained CoL ii. 11, 12. " In whom also," namely Christ, " ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ : buried with him in baptism ; wherein also ye are risen with him, through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead." ' Here,' says Dr Erskine, in his sermon on in- fant baptism*, ' the apostle, to withdraw the Colossians ' from the rites of the ceremonial law, and particularly ' from circumcision, to which the Jews warmly urged ' them to adhere, observes, that they were complete in ' Christy all spiritual blessings being in him, and ali * ordinances necessary to their happiness or comfort, ♦being appointed by him ; that in him they had th& * thing signified by circumcision, being sanctified in * him, and so having put off the body of the sins of the ^ jlesh ; and that, though circumcision was completely * Erskine's Sermons, Vol. II. p. 202. ^ IN SUPPORT OF PEDO-BAPTISM. 269 ^ abolished under the gospel, they and their infant seed * had baptism in its room, to represent and to seal to * them the blessings of the covenant of grace. The * apostle's argument,' he adds, ' would have been in- * complete and inconclusive, could the Jews have alle- * ged, that, under the old dispensation, their infants had * promises belonging to them, and a claim to circumci- ' sion as the seal of these promises 3 but that now they ' were deprived of both^ and had nothing equally valu- ' able substituted in their room.' Thus far Dr Erskine ; and it is but fair to acknow- ledge, that with his general view of the passage we heartily acquiesce. But he seems here to assert more than the text authorizes^ which, for the truth's sake, we are bound to point out. Than the assertion, ' Thougl* * circumcision was completely abolished under the gos- * pel^ they and their infant seed had baptism in its * room,' nothing can be more unhappy in the place where it stands^ For first, the text does not at all au- thorize it. There is not a syllable either in text or context, respecting children. The apostle says indeed respecting " the saints and faithful brethren in Christ*," to whom he is writing, that they themselves '* were circumcised with the circumcision made without hands," ^liat i^ t9 say, with spiritual circumcision, but not a wprd does he speak concerning their children. Again, their being complete in Christ, did not consist in having their children nominally connected with them in the co- venant of grace, but in themselves being personal par- takers of the Saviour's grace, and in the boundless grace of the Saviour answering all their individual exigencies. In opposition to all who would derogate from the Saviour's glory, by representing him as a creature, the apostle declares him, eh. i. IS, — 19." to b«" * Cliap. i. 2, 270 EXAIVllNATION OF DETACHED PASSAG.ES, the supreme God. And the expression he emjiloys in the J 9th verse of the first chapter, he resumes in the 9th verse of the second, which verse contains a general truth, and is the foundation of that which immediately follows. For the apostle having declared that in Christ dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead -bodily, imme- diately adds, " and ye are complete in him, who is the Head of all principality and power." Such then is the completion of the Christian. It does not consist in nameless or ideal blessings, extending to the t)ffspring of believers, but in real and substantial blessings com- municated to their own soul, throuoh the belief of the truth. As the apostle John says, " They beheld his glory, and received of his fulness grace for grace *." We therefore humbly apprehend, and that in opposi- tion to so great authority as Dr Erskine's, the apostle's argument to be both complete and conclusive, notwith- standing he be considered as never having had Pedo-bap- tism in his view. The superiority of the latter over the former dispensation, does not consist in the number or external grandeur of its ordinances, but in having the substance in the place of the shadow, the thing signified instead of the sign. This is the grand principle upon which its real supe- riority is founded, and, I may add, the only principle upon which the apostle seems here to proceed. The superiority of the Gentiles over the Jews did not consist in their having' ordinances substituted in the room of such as were rendered obsolete by the introduction of the gospel, but in obtaining, in reality, the things spiritually represented in these ordinances. Thus circiimcisiotiy for example, the very subject the apostle here adduces, though abrogated and rendered void by the new dispen- sation, converts to this dispensation would yet suffer no * John i. ll. 16. IN SUPPORT OF FEDO-BAPTISM. 271 ubridgment of privileges, so long as they could enjoy one of the grandest designs implied in circumcision, that is to say, the cirtttmcision cf the heart. This is evidently what he means by their being " circumcised with the circum- cision made without hands." This circumcision con- sisted in their '' putting off the body of the sins of the flesh," or in other words, their renouncing the old man, which is corrupt, aad tfieir putting on the new man, by their conversion to Christianity. And because baptism, in those early ages, was always connected, or followed upon the first profession which any made of the doctrines of the gospel, the apostle here refers to it, yer. 12. in- sinuating that the circumcision he had mentioned in the preceding verse, was presupposed, by their being "buried with Christ in baptism, wherein also they are," figura- tively, "• raised with him, through the faith of the ope- ration of God, who hath raised him from the dead." Thus do we clearly percei\'e, that the apostle, neither in the circuincision of which he is here speaking on the one hand, nor baptism on the other, has children in the smallest in his vie.iv^ but restricts both to such as were circumcised in their hearty and baptized accordingly, as a consequence of their personal profession of^ the faith in- to which they had been begotten through the operation of God. As connected with the passage just now discussed, we proceed to consider Rem. xv. 8. where Christ is styled a minister of the circumcision. How this text is made to bear on the point of Pedo-baptism, I confess myself at a loss to say, having never heard it accounted for ; but certain I am that it has been adduced in support of that system, and asserted in the most confident manner, as confirming it beyond the possibility of a doubt. What a pity it is that the grounds of such a positive assertion were not produced, for then wft could have judged for 272 EXAMINATION OF DETACHilD PASSAGES, ourselves ; however, as this is not the case, we shall at- tempt the elucidation of the passage notwithstanding, to the best of our ability. Well then, when we read of Jesus Christ as a minister of the circumcision, are we not naturally led to inc^uire, And nuho were the circumcision of which Christ was a mi- nister ? And to this question the division of the aposto- lic charge completely furnishes us with an answer. The twelve apostles were likewise called ministers of the word, and the subjects of their charge were divided into two classes, namely, the circumcision and the uncircumci- sion *. Now if we consult the history of our blessed Lord, we shall find that it was only to \hejirst class that he was sent in regard to his personal ministry, notwith- standing he v/as to be for salvation to all the ends of the earth. At a very early period Moses intimated to the Israelites that the Lord would raise up a prophet from amongst their brethren like unto him, who should teach and instruct them as he had done ; so that for the ac- -con^plishment of this very prediction it was necessary that Jesus Christ, to w^hom undoubtedly it referred, should appear as a teacher and a prophet to that parti- cular people. Accordingly we read, that when he came, " he came to his ow«f j" that he was not sent save to the lost sheep of the house of Israel % ; and that when he sent forth the twelve to preach the gospel, he commanded them expressly, " spying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not ; but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel ^." All which passages abundantly shew in what respects Christ was a minister of the circumcision. The next object then comes to be, to ascertain the design of the apostle in introducing such an expression * Gal. ii. 7, 8, 9. f John i. 11. I Mat. ^v. 2i.. '^ Mdt. X. 5, 6. IN SUPPORT OF PEDO-BAPTISM. *" 27S m the passage now under consideration. The apostle is here, as the context evinceth, maintaining the unanimity among Christians, shewing, by a variety of arguments, chap. xiv. that Christians ought not to separate from each other on account of difference of sentiments. Then after having suggested some of the most beautiful and apposite reflexions in the beginning of chap. xv. he con- cludes, ver. 7. " wherefoi-e receive ye one another," in.. ^ to your communion, namely, " as Christ also hath re- ceived us*^ all, whether Jews or Gentiles, into his fami- ly, " to the glory of God." The Jews had no right to object to the admission of the Gentiles into the church, on account of their not attending to many things they considered as sacred, and as little had the Gentiles any right to oppose the admission of the Jews on account of their scrupulously attending to meats and days^ and a va- riety of other things from v/hich they justly considered themselves as forced by the gospel of Christ. It was not their prerogative to judge one another in these things ; but he who thought he had faith in the obser- vance or non-observance of them " was to have it for himself before God," chap. xiv. 22. Whilst one be- lieved that he might eat all things alike, aftd another who was weak, and of course could not take to himself that latitude, had therefore to content himself with herbs ; this was equally the rule for them both, " Let Hot him that eateth despise him that eateth not, and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth ; for Cod hath received both the one and the other," ver. 23. *' Wherefore," as the apostle asserts, chap. xv. 7. *' we are bound to receive one another, as Christ also hath received us, to the glory of God." But as to the union of Gentiles and Jews into one body, it might be urged as an objection, as the apostle Mm 274- EXAMINATION OF DETACHED PASSAGES, here insinuates, that if Christ meant to receive the for- mer, he would have preached to them himself. But ' to this objection,' as Dr Macknight observes^ ' the ' apostle replied, that Jesus Christ was born a Jew, and ' preached to the Jews only, because thereby, in the ' end, he most effectually accomplished God's promises ' to the fathers, concerning the blessing of the nations in ' Abraham's seed *.' Though our blessed Lord did not preach to the nations personally, he was not, however, forgetful of them, for he commanded in general his gos- pel to be preached to every creature ; and, in particu- lar, he commissioned his servant Paul, as his chosen ves- sel, to go far hence amongst the Gentiles, bearing his name, and proclaiming through the blood of his cross the remission of sins. Thus were the '* Gentiles made to glorify God for his mercy," to glorify him for ma- king the once crucified, but now exalted Redeemer, the head of the heathen — to rejoice together with his peo- ple— to praise the Lord ; yea, exceedingly tp praise him for his merciful kindness, which was great towards them f. Now, after such a delightful representation, is it not painful to be under the necessity of still recurring to the old subject, and of enquiring what connexion has this passage with the point in hand ? Assuredly if it go a single step in proof of Pedo-baptism, there is not a sub- ject in the universe but what it may prove ! As we did not finish entirely the subject respecting households' in the preceding chapter, we shall accordingly resuttie it, ^nd give the remainder in this place. When formerly speaking on this subject, we saw that the terni * His view and illustration of the xv. chap, of the epistle to, the Romans. I Compare with this text 2 Sam. xxii. 4'l. v^O, anJ Psal. xviii. 4r3. 49. and alsa Psal. cxvii. IN SUPPORT OF PEDO-BAPTISM. 275 hotisehold always includes the whole of the domestics of the family, no less than the children ; yea, that in se- veral instances it includes the former, but not the latter, but never the latter and not the former. Here we are therefore to enquire upon what principle does it appear, that the households mentioned in the New Testament ^were baptized ? Whether was it on account of the faith orf the respective heads of those households, or on ac- count of their personal faith ? And again, whether there were children in those families, or even servants ; and whether they were both placed on a level, and had bap- tism administered to them equally, as circumcision was administered to the children and domestics of Abraham's household of old ? Answers to these questions, we con- ceive, in as far as the Scriptures niay guide us, will fur- nish us with all the information necessary on thi^ head. We begin accordingly with that of Zaccheus, as it is the first in order, see Luke xix. 1, — 10. This passage we advert to, not because baptism is spoken of, but be- cause at the conversion of Zaccheus, salvation is said to have come to his house. But to understand the subject aright, it will be necessary briefly to review the narra- tive at large. The Lord Jesus Christ, a man mighty in word and deed among the Jews in those days, in the course of his public ministry, *' entered and passed through Jericho," ver. 1. His fame had created general attention, and amongst the rest, Zaccheus, the subject of this history, was desirous to see Jesus who he was, ver. 3, But being little of stature, he found it impossible to get an advantageous view of him, while he remained on a level with his companions. He therefore thought of going before, in order to choose a proper situation, that he might see Jesus as he passed. He climbed up accord- ingly to a sycamore-tree ; and here it was, to the astonish- 276 EXAMINATION OF DETACHED PASSAGES, ment of the whole multitude, that Jesus manifested his concern to see Zacchcus, as much as Zaccheus had done to see him ; and therefore, looking up, he said unto him, " Zaccheus, make haste and come down, for to- day I must abide at thy housed The honour thus conferred upon Zacchcus, who, though he was rich, yet was a sinner, and noted for fil- ling an office held in universal abhorrence among the Jews, excited their envious minds with indignation at the conduct of the Saviour. But he here shewed that wis- dom was justified of her children. Zaccheus, though an hard-hearted unrelenting extortioner before, by the gracious look and order of his Master, now manifested that he was changed into the •same image ; for having come down and received him joyfully, he stood and said unto the Lord, " Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor, and if I have taken any thing from any man by false accusation, I restore- him four-fold." Hereupon Jesus wgis presented with the finest oppor- tunity of exposing, and putting to the blush his constant and invidious adversaries. Therefore, immediately upon Zaccheus' confession, he turned to them, " and said con- cerning him," Why do ye oppose my going .to be a guest with this man, to abide at his house ? He is not a sinner of the Gentiles as ye suppose, for this day is he converted. Salvation has come to his house this day, so that in going to him, I am going to be entertained by a true son of Abraham according to the faith. Such appears to us to be the true spirit and meaning of the passage. The introduction of the word house in the 9th verse, seems to have been occasioned by the opposition manifested to Christ's inviting himself to abide ^at the house of Zaccheus^ ver. 5. And the Saviour, to shew that there was no good grounds for the objection that was urged, evinceth that the house was not now IN SUPPORT OF PEDO-BAPTISM. 2/7 what it formerly was, but that Zaccheus, the head of it, was converted, had obtained salvation, and was rrxade a true son of Abraham, and that therefore, he was acting in character to go to such a house. In no other sense than that nqw specified, can we un- derstand salvation having coitk- co the house of Zac- cheus, if by salvation be intended any thing more than the means of salvation. But we arc decidedly of opinion that more is intended, and that therefore, by the expression house^ we must understand the head of the house, which we have accordingly done, as it is his conversion only of which we have any evidence. Those who desire more on this subject, may consult Poole, Scott, and other commentators. In regard to .our considering the 10th verse as ad- dressed to the people, the passage itself fully justifies our conduct, for Zaccheus is there spoken of as the third person, which could not have been the case if Je- sus had not been speaking to others concerning him *. The next account respecting households, is that of Lydia, Acts xvi. 14, 15. " And a certain woman named Lydia, a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira, who worshipped God, heard us, whose heart the Lord open- ed, that she attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul. And when she was baptized, and her house- hold, she besought us, saying. If ye have judged me ^o be faithful to the Lord, come into my house, and abide there. And she constrained us." The very scanty information this passage affords in. relation to the subject in hand, fully justifies the opinion we have long entertained respecting the whole of this class, namely, that nothing decisive can be gathered from them, either for the one side or the other. However, » Vid. Campbell on the Gospels, in lac. 278 EXAMINATION OF DETACHED PASSAGES, as they have been employed both by Baptists and Pe- do-baptists in support of their respectjve tenets with such an air of certainty, it is necessary for the sake of truth that they should be attended to, and each made to rest simply on its own merits. In the case before us, we freely own it was not very likely that Lydia had any children with her in Philippi, for according to the account, she was a citizen of Thy- atira, and had only come thither in the course of her business ; and being a devout person, and one who wor- shipped God, it was too precious an opportunity to let slip the meeting of the religious at the river side on the Sabbath-day. The effects produced on the heart of Lydia, were such as warranted Paul to administer unto her the ordi- nance of baptism, as Peter had done under similar cir- cumstances to Cornelius and his Gentile brethren *. As we have expressed our opinion respecting the household of Lydia, that it was unlikely there were children in it, so we acknowledge that little more can be said respecting the baptizing of her household, which will be at all likely to decide the question either on the one side or the other. The baptism of her household is here recorded, it is true ; but there is not a word re- specting nuho composed that household, whether it con- sisted of infants or adults ; or whether they were bap- tized on account of the faith of Lydia, or on account of their own faith. Yet information in regard to these points, which God, in his infinite wisdom has thought it meet to withhold from us, is absolutely necessary ere any assume the high and dictatorial language, which alas ! is too frequently done on this very subject. Some have supposed, that the household of Lydia was bap- tized on account of her faith, from the circumstance cf * Acts X. 44,— 48, IN SUPPORT OF PEDO-BAPTISM. 279 her employing the singular number, when she said, " If ye have judged me * to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house and abide there." But this is too far-fetched and forced an interpretation to decide a question of such importance ; and we may even appeal to the common sense of those who urge it, that if they were in Lydia's circumstances, judging it proper to in- tdte the servants of the Lord to their house, whether they 'would not adopt expressly the same language, not- withstanding their children or domestics had been bap- tized along with them even on account of their oivn faith. If Lydia was the mistress of the house, as we see no room to q^uestion it, this alone accounts for her mode of speech on the occasion, without needing to have recourse to any hypothesis which the rules of sobriety and good sense will by no means warrant. But on the other hand, Mr M'Lean f thinks that he makes this passage very clear, and places it beyond all manner of dispute, as proving his side of the question, by referring to the 4-Oth verse, where it is said concerning Paul and Silas, that '* they went out of the prison, and enteB^ed into the hoxise of Lydia, and, when they had seen the brethren, they comforted them and departed." The brethren here he supposes in the same arbitrary man- ner, as we have just seen to be of Lydia s hoiiseholdc But upon this supposition may it not be asked, and was this solitary family the whole of the concern the apostles had at that time in that city ? Or were they going in a mean and seiiisli manner to repay a debt alone incurred by the generosity of their hostess, and to comfort only * I here allude to a sentiment which dropped from Mr Ewing in the course of the last baptism he adreinisieied iiutlicly in this place. + Vii.l. his Commission, o. 116. second edit. 280 EX/VMIXATION OF DETACHED PASSAGES, her and her family, while all the other brethren who were wont to meet tor prayer at the river side were fo be overlqoked ? Would it not be much better then, to consider the brethren in this passage, as referring to all the believers in Philippi, than in any forced or arbi* trary manner, evidently for the sake of supportipg a system, give it a sense which it will by no means bear? We are not called to contend thus for the faith. Nay, we must bear it in our mind, as a general maxim, that he that striveth for the mastciy must titrive lawfully, or else it is impossible he can be crowned. Thus I confess, whatever others may think, I leave this subject as I found it, deciding clearly neither for the one side nor the other, unless we shall be allowed to interpret it by other passages similar in kind, which accordingly we propose to do j not formally, however^ but merely as we go along. The next accouut of the baptism of households, is that of the jailor, Acts xvi. 31, — 34<. " And they said^ Believe on the Lord Jesiis Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house. And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house, and he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes ; and was baptized, he and all his straight-* way. And when he had brought then) into his house^ he set meat before them, and rejoiced, believing in God with all his house." The chief difficulty here, arises, not from the cir- cumstance of the jailor's household being baptized along with himself, for the principle cannot be more explicit- ly stated upon whicli they were so j but from the apostle's address to him, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christy and thou shalt be saved, and thy house,'''' Now, the natural question would appear to be, was the jailor's house to be saved as well as hirasclf, upon his Individual IN SUPPORT OF PEDO-BAPTlSM. 281 belief on the Saviour ? Or if this was not the case, what then may have been the cause and the purport of this appendage, and thy house f It strikes me, (but I mention it merely as a probable conjecture), that the jailor's family, amidst the dreadful catastrophe that had happened in consequence of the earthquake, were equal- ly alarmed as himself in regard to the concerns of their soul j for it is likely they all inhabited thaVvery dwel- ling, " the foundations of which were shaken ;" were probably witness too, to the cruel treatment the apostles had received the pptceding day ; were equally astonish- ed with him when they discerned the finger of God in the event, for they were, no doubt, the persons who as- - sisted in fetching the " light," and accompaning the trembling jailor, and witnessed him falling prostrate before them, and perhaps were as ready as he was, to cry out, '* Sirs, what must we do to be saved ?" As our Lord, therefore, frequently answered questions which were put by one of his disciples, but which re- lated to them all, in conformity to their general interest* therein ; so may the apostles' answer to the question of the Philippian on the present occasion, be considered. It is more than probable that they were agitated and concerned as he was on the present occasion ; and that the apostles had access to know it we have no room to doubt, for we are expressly told that he brought them out, ere he put the question, *' Sirs, what must I do to be saved ?" Hereupon, most probably, the apostles be- held a whole family in the jaws of despair, and as one only had put the question, these servants of the Most High, in imitation of their great Master, answer him in such a manner as to excite hope at the same time in the rest. Upon this supposition, therefore, their answer was most wise. And had it been otherwise, and re- Nn 282 EXAMINATION OF DETACHED PASSAGES, stricted to the querist himself, it might have had such an effect upon some of the others as to have snapped the brittle thread of life in a moment, and thus have- placed them beyond the reach of hope. But however these things may be, we are certain as to their baptism, that they were all personally in- terested in the blessings of salvation, by a personal "be- lief of the doctrines declared to them ; for words can- not be plainer than those in ver. 34. that the jailor, *' having been baptized, and all his straightway, brought the apostles into his house, set meat before them, and rejoiced^ believing in God with all his housed And I must just here add, that the speedy evidence of faith being thus produced in the family of the jailor, tends not a little to corroborate the supposition we have hazarded respecting them. And, moreover, if they had not been present on the occasion, how could the apostles, stran- gers in Philippi, and particularly the jail, have possibly known whether the jailor had a family or not ? The next instance we^'meet with, is that of Crispus the chief ruler of the synagogue at Corinth. But this ease is so very clear, that we need to do nothing more than quote the passage. Acts xviii. 8. ^" And Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his Jwuse ; and many of the Corinthians hear- ing, believed, and were baptized." Nor does the case of Stephanas and his household seem to be a whit more doubtful. In this case Paul was the baptizer, 1 Cor. i. 16. and he bears them witness that they ivere the first-fruits of Achaia^ and that they addicted themselves to the ministry of the saints, chap. xvi. 15. Now, from the state of these three last instances of the baptism of households, are we not warranted to con- clude what must have been the state of the first ? Whe- ther is it more reasonable to regard the silence in the IN SUPPORT OF FEDO-BAPTISM. 283 one, as proving all that is contended for by Pedo-baptists,, than to consider the others as a key by which to inter- j)ret that silence ? Surely, between the degree of reason- ableness in these two cases, there can be no comparison. Taking the last, therefore, as expletive of the first, we conclude that the household of Lydia, though it is not expressed, musUiave been believers as wc find the others to have been ; and if so, then all arguments for Pedq- baptiSm, drawn from this source, must be entirely nu- gatory. Having thus finished what we intended in regard to the baptizing of households, we proceed to the consider- ation of another set of passages which occur in th© course of Paul's reasoning in his epistles to the Romans and Galatians. These, it may be observed, form the subject of Mr Wardlaw's lectures. We shall not here, however, attempt to make any formal answer to them ; this having been done very ably by another *. Nei- ther do we propose to say all that might be said on this important subject. All ^hat we intend, is a very brief view, in order to discover whether it has any con- nection either more immediately or remotely with the subject of Pedo-baptism. The passages we allude to, are contained in the 4th chapter of the epistle to the Romans, and in the third of that to the Galatians. The apostle seems to be treating of the same subject \\\ both, which is, the doctrine of justification by faith without the works of the law. To both these passages we have spoken somewhat already f. We have seen that the apostle proves the point for which he is contending, in the clearest manner possible, by the circumstance of Abraham having been justified * IVftlVrLean. f See p. 3 ii. Secant^ ^h:ir. ii. sect. 4-. 284 EXAMINATION OF DETACHED PASSAGES, through faitJi,whilehe wasyetuncIrcumcised,Rom. iv. 10. He then proceeds to specify a particular reason ivhy the ordinance of circumcision was given. Though it was " a seal of the righteousness of the faith" which Abra- ham possessed prior to it, it was not to be regarded in his case so much in a personal as in a federal point of view, namely, " that he might be l||e Father of all them that believe^ though they be not circumcised, that righteousness might be imputed to them*also," ver. 11. But lest the Jews might consider this statement as ex- cluding them, the apostle immediately shews that this federal connection between Abraham and believers of the uncircumcision, was not entirely confined to them, but that by circumcision he was likewise federa/fi/ a fa- ther *' to them who are not of the circumcision onltf, but who also walk in the footsteps of the faith of our fath«r Abraham, which he had in uncircumcision," ver. 12*. From these verses it is therefore manifest, that cir- cumcision was given to Abraham as a seal, assuring and confirming, that all uncircumcised Gentiles who believ- ed, were to be reckoned as his children ; and were to obtain righteousness through faith, as he had done, even in their uncircumcised state. And it is no less evident in regard to the Jews, that this federal relation between Abraham and believers, does not extend to them all, but to such only as are possessed of like precious faith with Abraham, which he had in uncircumcision. The apostle next proceeds to prove his position, ♦' that justification is by faith without the works of the law," from this circumstance, that " the promise that Abraham should be the heir of the world," that is to * This verse» in my opinion, clearly intimates the distinction between the two seeds of Abraham ; but for a more particular vi*" v uf which, the reader is referred to chap. II. of this work. IN SUPPORT OF PEDO-BAPTISM. 283 say, the whole believing nvorld^ whether Jews or Gen- tiles, *' WHS not made to Abraham, or to his seed through the law, but through the righteousness of faith," ver. 13. It was upon Abraham's believing the promise of God, that *' he should have an heir who should come forth of his own bowels," and " a seed," doubtless spiritual as well, as natural, " who should resemble the stars of the heavens for multitude," that " his faith" was originally *' counted to him for righteousness * ;" and, therefore, the law, which was not till four hun- dred and thirty years afterwards, could not alter the constitution established by the promise, *' that right- eousness or justification should be by faith alone f." The apostle then declares, ver. 14. that if a right to the inheritance of the blessings connected with justification *' were by the law, then faith would be rendered void, and the promis,e," which restricted them to the instru- mentality of faith alone, " made of none effect." But this promise of blessing 'believers of all nations. Gen- tiles as well as Jews, with the blessing of justification in this world, and of life eternal in the world to come, we are assured. Gal. iii. 17. was ratified in the cove- nant with Abraham by God himself concerning his Son Jesus Christ ; and that therefore, ** the law, whiqh was four hundred and thirty years after the promise, can- not disannul it, that the promise should be made of none effect." No, indeed. Even the simple promise of Jehovah, who is not a man that he should lie, nor the son of man that he should repent, effectually secured its immutability. But God inclining to afford to the heirs of promise greater security still, in a manner, gave not only the simple promise, but accompanied and confirm -^ ed the promise with an oath %• It was therefore vaii;^. * See Gen. XV. 4, 5, 6. t Gal. iii. 17. X See Gen. xxii. 16, 17. and Heb. vi. 13. to. the cnwhat may be erroneous parts of it. 292 RECirROCAL CHARGES BROUGHT The Baptist side of the question must be wrong, it is contended, because their principles lead them to de- ny the most part, if not the whole of the Old Testa- ment— ^the spirituality of the Abrahamic covenant — and the sanctification of the Sabbath. Their principles lead them to throw such a carnal air over the whole of the former dispensation, that they cannot but be wrong. And, moreover, how is it possible, upon their princi- ples, to attend to the apostolic injunction, to '* Traiu up your children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord." ' The very foundation of this duty is syst«- * matically assailed,' s^y they, ' by the Baptist princi- * pies *.' And, withal, if you become a Baptist, then you must give up all concern for the salva,tion of sin- ners. But besides these awful charges, there are others which would be termed in law, vexatious charges, such as that of looking upon their brethren who see it their duty to change their sentiments on this point, as weak, deluded, deranged in their intellects, led by novelty, with a variety of other rash and indelicate expressions which we would here decline enumerating. Now, ** if they were our enemies who thus reproach us, then could we bear it ; but they are our brethren, onr familiar friends, and our acquaintance, with whom we took sweet counsel together, and walked to the house of God in company f." They are our brethren in the fellowship of the gospel ; the elect of God, we trust, holy and beloved ; called to put on bowels of mercies, kindness, humility of mind, meekness, long-suffering ; to keep the unity of the body in the bond of peace ; to be one with all saints, that the world may know that the Father hath sent the Son, and that the Son calleth * Mr Walker's thoughts on baptism, p. II. f Psal.lva2,14. BY BOTH SIDES ©F THE QUESTION. 293 his people to love as brethren, to be pitiful and cour^ teous, tender-hearted, forbearing one another, and for-, giving one another, even as God, for his sake, hath for- given them ; to look not everj man on his own things^ but every man also on tlie things of others, that God in all may bp glorified. Nor are our Baptist brethren altogether free of the implication qf bringing the hard charges here complain- ed of; though we must confess that our intercourse with them has not been so particular as to have afforded us an opportunity of observing their general behaviour in this respect. We have always, however, considered it as exceedingly unseemly in them, to talk, as many of them do, respecting infant baptism — styling it with a degree of contempt, infant sprinkling — and even, that you may as well baptize dogs as infants, justifying their conduct by quoting the language of sacred writ, that %vitJiout are dogs. But tlie mere narration of general grievances is not what we mean to deal in, we must go a step further, to see whether they be well or ill founded. First, then, in what respect do the Baptist principles lead to a de- nial, cither in whole or in part, of the Old Testament ? I do not §ee how any, for my part, convinced of the divine authenticity of .those sacred records, can deny any portion of them. A difference there may be in re- gard to the c^xplanation of them, but the text of both Testaments, as it stands simply in the Bible, must be admitted on all hands. I suppose it is then about the explanation, and not the text itself, that the difference exists. Here, the one denies and the other denies, yet the text itself is admitted by both ; wliich, therefore, \s in the right ? To determine this question, we must f x*mine (heir respective theories. ?. Again, how is it that the Baptist priuciplea dpny 29* RECIFRQCAL CHARGES BROUGHT the spirituality of the Abrahatnic covenant ? And here i must answer for myself, whatever be the opinion of others on this head. I confess myself to be of those principles, that is to say, I do not see the baptizing of infants to be scriptural, and yet I do not deny the spirit- uality of the Abrahamic covenant. Yea, I will go far- ther. I will solemnly aver, that I never had such a consistent spiritual view of this subject while I was of opposite sentiments, as I have now obtained through the goodness of God leading me to view it in the man- ner I have related in the preceding parts of this work. But here, by the way, is it not as great an evil to make that spiritual which is only carnal, as it is to make that carnal which is spiritual ? It will never surely be main- tained that the one would be nearer the truth than the other. Let our brethren then who bring the charge ot denying the spirituality of that covenant, see to it whe- ther they be not making it too spiritual ; for if they should err here, as there is indeed every reason to con- clude they do, though it may be considered as an error on the right side, yet will it lead them to equally er- x'oneous views of what God intended by it, as an error on the other side. 3. Thirdly, How do Baptist principles lead to the non- sanctification of the Lord's day ? If some who profess those principles should profane the Sabbath, or not set apart the whole of that day to the Lord, does such con- 4uct necessarily flow from the principles which lead us to decide respecting baptism, or is it not rather to be attributed to the effect of other principles held in con- junction with these ? For my part, as I have said be- fore, I have no objections to own with the charge of being of Baptist principles, in as far as they respect the unscriptural nature of that ordinance when applied to- infants, and yet I have no idea of denying the sancti^» iY BOTii SIDES OF THE QJJESTION. ^9o <6ation of the Sabbath. I conceive it to have been wise- ly appointed by the great Head of the church, to be a means of supplying his people with spiritual nourish- ment and growth in grace. And as an emblem of the eternal Sabbath to be enjoyed in the sanctuary above, we ought to say with David, " Blessed are they thai dwell in thy house, there they shall still be praising tiheei For a day in thy courts is better than a thou- sand ; I had rather be a door-keeper in the house of my God, than to dwell in the tents, in the palaces of wickedness *." A seventh part of our time to be devoted particular- ly to the service of the Lord, is a moral duty in itself — was appointed from the beginning. Gen. ii. 2, 3. ; and Jfrom all the information of the New Testament, seems never to have been deviated from, excepting in tlie change of the day. Moreover, becalise some profes- sing Christians have abominably unholy and ungodly lives, is the charge therefore to be brought against the religion they profess, or against some corrupt principles they hold in conjunction herewith ? Not against the former surely, though here it is that infidels always fix the charge, but against the letter. For the lives of Such people belie their profession, and every precept of the religion they profess condemns them to their face. Let Christians therefore see to it, that they are not in this joining with the infidel^ in endeavouring to sub- stantiate the charge we are now considering. 4?. In the fourth place, how do the Baptist principles cartialize the whole of the former dispensation ? Here 1 should suppose, that even Pedo-baptists will not venture to affirm, that that dispensation was "wholly spiritual. The apostle himself, indeed, speaks of carnal things connected with it. In drawing a proper line of dis> '* Psal.lvxxiv. 4. 10. 296 RECIPROCAL CHARGES BROUGHT tinction then between what was spiritual and what car* nal, is it fair that we should be taxed with denying the one altogether ? For my part, if I could conceive of any, whether Baptist or Pedo-baptist, disposed to ques- tion the existence of spiritual matters in that dispensa- tion, I would not hesitate to say he was wrong, as the examples of the faith of Abraham, Job, Moses, &c. do clearly evince. But would the person not be equally erring, who from such examples would declare the whole to have been spiritual ? Here then^ as in a for* mer instance, it is impossible to decide the merits of the question, without examining their respective tenets, and bringing these to the touch-stone of the word, for it is to the law and to the ic^timony ; and if the sen^- timents of any man agree not herewith, it is because he has not divine light in him. 5. But fifthly^ how do these principles " incapacitate us for the discharge of parental duties, or of bringing up our children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord •* How do they systematically assail the very foundation of this duty ?" Can this duty not be discharged, sim- ply in obedience to the apostolic injunction ? Or is it necessary to set aside this injunction, as the very sug-> gestion of the charge would seem to imply, and to en- force it entirely upon another principle, that, to wit, of theiii interest in the covenant with Abraham ? But this last is the grand poifit in dispute, the other is not dis- puted at all. It stnnds clear and valid, and the pro- fessing Christian who is chargeable with defects in re- gard to it, may be convicted of his sin at once ; where- as taking him up upon the other ground, he may be- take himself to subterfuges from which it is impossible to beat him out. Witli what grace could it be urged upon a brother who was defective here, " We per- ceive, brother, that you are deficient in the discharge of BY BOTH SIDES OF THE QJJESTION. 297 that most Important duty of instructing your childi;cn in religious knowledge. Now, this must proceed from your erroneous notions in regard to their situation in the covenant of grace. Do but allow yourself to be cor- rected here, and we are morally certain it will be other- wise.'* Such mode of reasoning is certainly implied In the objection. It affirmatively implies the certainty of attaining the end, by the adoption bf the opposite prin- ciples. Now we ask, is the end In reality a single ■whit better secured by the espousal of the one more than the other ? Were we to descend to particular in- stances, should we not find as many, yea, and a great deal more neglect of the religious education of children among those who baptize them in infancy, than among those who delay their baptism till they be personally convinced of the truth of our holy religion, and prqfess faith in the only Saviour for themselves ? Nay, is there any comparison between these two systems, for ration- ally leading to such instruction ? That of the Baptist system, speaking even as a neutral person, when right- ly understood, has something in it which must render godly parents exceedingly zealous for the religious In- struction of their children ; for besides the express In- junction to this duty, their principles, which continually lead them to look upon their children's true state, as being children of wrath, must mightily stimulate them, that so under God they may be the means of their con- version ; whereas the system of the others, by which they consider their children as being already in the co- venant of grace, and by consequence in a state of safety, has every thing in it, in my apprehension, to render pa- rents in regard to this duty, careless and remiss. Thus do we see by a fair investigation of principles, how exceedingly unfounded the charge really is; And 298 RECIPROCAL CHARGES BROUGHT now, though we might with as good a grace heap chargey upon the other side, we shall not give vent to our evil passions in so doing, but shall simply beseech our bre- thren to beware of acting any longer in the manner they have done in regard to this subject. 6. The last charge we were to notice, was the ivant tf zeal for the conversion of sinners. And here, I sup- pose, it would become us all better, rather llian bring- ing it as a charge against one another, each of us to be deeply humbled for our woeful short-comings in this respect. If we perceive our brethren deficient in this, our zeal for the Lord is not to be manifested* by yarring at them, but in lending an active hand towards the furthering of his neglected cause, remeinbering that our work in the vineyard is increased in proportion as the labourers are few. Here then, we ought all to be up and doing the work of the Lord ; and truly, if we had more zeal amongst ourselves, our good exam- ple might be the means of stimulating our brethren, and at all events, we should find our hands so much oc- cupied in the pursuit of more important objects, tliat we would not have leisure for lodging complaints against one another of this nature. Such coraplaijits, to me, I confess, always convey the idea of weariness of the work in those who make them. Instead of it appear- ing to be a work of love, by which they are animated and inflamed to endure hardiness as good soldiers, by such conduct it appears to be a work of drudgery, too heavy to be borne, and hence they angrily complain against their brethren for not assisting them. It would be desireablc, it is true, were all the Lord's people to appear as one united body, having nothing but one in- terest and one cause common to them all, in which there .were no seeking every man his own things, but evtvy man thethings of others, his neighbour's good to edifi- BY BOTH SIDES OF THE QUESTION. S99 cation — even the things that are Christ's, that he might be all and in all. Till this period arrive, however, and we have every reason to hope that it shall, the duty of such as are looking and longing for its accomplishment, is certainly the reverse of that of complaining in an ir- ritating manner against their brethren. If their bre- thren be faulty in the respect we are coiiu^idering, it is certainly their duty to endeavour to convince them of their error by an opposite conduct ; and this, they may rest assured, will be attended with infinitely better ef- fects, than what would accompany even the most for- cible things they could urge by way of complaint. But still the question recurs, how do Baptist prin- ciples impede the zeal of Christians in the conversion of sinners ? Do we not know for certain, that there are in ex-stence societies even of this description, I mean our Baptist brethren in England, whose exertions in this respect have been incalculable ? so that instead of they needing to copy after our example, we have rather reason to copy after theirs. Facts of this nature must then bring the matter within a narrower compass ; they must convince us, that the evil complained of is not peculiar, nor at all to be ascribed to those principles, but that it flows from some other source entirely distinct from them^ and which may be seen to have much more extensive influence, pervading Christian societies even of various descriptions, much more than we may be aware. Does it not then come to be an act of positive injustice^ to as- cribe to any set of principles, effects which do not be- long to them, and to decry those principles as erroneous and dangerous, upon no other ground than this false al- legation ? Is it not then to be sincerely wished, that Ciiristians would only consider what they are about ? Another grievous evil, which it is here proper to notice, is; that of endeavouring, as it would appear. 500 RECIPROCAL CHARGES BROUGHT to misunderstand one another's reasoning on this subject. I have enumerated about fiftj different pla-* ces in Mr Pirie's Letters to Mr M'Lean, which, in my judgnnent, come under this description, and can be attributed to nothing save a captious and cavilling spirit. See, besides, how atignlt/ he speaks on the subject. ' »t is highly probable that the Baptist ideas * will prevail. Dipping is a novelty in this country. * Mankind, too, are fond of a showy, ritual religion, ' chiefly if it points out an easy way to heaven. Such ' is that of the Baptists. The weak, the splenetic, the ' fanciful, the fond of novelty, the lovers of pleasure * must naturally embrace such a religion. The Soci- ' nians or half Deists also, are mostly Baptists in prin- ' ciple. These two ideas combined, will, probably, in * a short time, form the reigning religion. I have not * the vanity to think that any thing I can say shall * reach conviction to the Baptists. The illusions of * fancy are not easily dissipated by reasoning and argu- * ment. The moment these people are dipped in wa- * ter, they too often shut their eyes against the light of * trwth — to be opened no more, while the ear can listen * with attention to nothing but the cry of the party — * plunge and be saved. When the young disciple has * been taught to exclaim against infant-baptism, which * he calls Roman-sprinkling, and to cry, what can in- ' fants do ? can an infant believe ? he has learned hi^ * whole lesson, and is dubbed an adapt in Christian ' knowledge.' These are expressions to be found in his preface. With such a frame of mind did this author begin ; and {he subsequent parts of his book shew how much he remained under its influence. Under this head also, the late controversy recorded in the third volume of the Edinburgh Evangelical Ma- gazine, between Crito and Philalethes, may with pro- BY BOTH SIDES PF THE QJJESTION. 30i piiety be noticed, for almost the one half of what there occurs consists of mutual recriminations ; the one af- firming ' that his words had been mistated, his mean- * ing misrepresented, and his argument misunderstood j' while the other, strenuously denying these allegations, retaliates in his turn, ' that his antagonist, so far from * repelling, has not even met his argument.' And in- deed, I must confess, after the most careful perusal I have been able to bestow on these papers, that there appears to be too much reason for these loud complaints. In the mean time, what a melancholy view do the pa- pers on both sides afford of the lamentable sectarian spirit so prevalent throughout the whole of Christen- dom ! A spirit which astonishes even heathens ! ' Rica,' as we learn from the Persian letters, ' having been to ' visit the library of a French convert, writes thus to ' his friend in Persia concerning what had passed. ' Father, said I to the librarian, what are these huge ' volumes which fill the whole side of the library ? ' Thescj said he, are the interpreters of the Scriptures. * There is a prodigious number of them, replied I ; the ' Scriptures must have been very dark formerly, and ' very clear at present. Do there remain still any ' doubts ? Are there now any points contested ? Are ' there, answered he with surprize, are there ? There * are almost as many as there are lines ? You astonish ' me, said I, what then have all these authors been * doino- ? These authors, returned he, never searched ' the Scriptures for %vhat ought to be believed, but for ' what they did believe themselves. They did not con- * sider them as a book, v.-.herein were contained the doo- " trines which they ought to receive, but as a work ^ which might be made to authorize their own ideas- ' For this reason, they have corrupted all the meanings, * and have put every passage to the torture, to make it 502 RECIPROCAL CHARGES BROUGHT * speak their own sense. 'Tls a country whereon ' people of all sects make invasions, and go for pillage; ' it is a field of battle, where, when hostile nations meet, ' they engage, attack, and skirmisli in a tliousand dif- ' ferent ways *.' W'lat a just, and at ihe same tirae, wjiat a dismal representation of real matter of fact is this ! ' How long ' will such spiritualgladiato)\s,' as Mr Newton some- where remarks, ' continue to slash one another for the * amusement of the public 1' No wonder that such con- duct should astonish a heathen, for we may rest as- sured that if such a passion could enter the world of spirits, it would excite astonishment even in the angels. These strictures I have taken the liberty to suggest with all the freedom of a friend. And it is hoped they will not be considered as imjxoper, as our chief desire is, not to speak lightly of our brethren, but really to awaken them to a consideration of what they are about. Nothing can afford us greater pleasure, than to see the doctrines of the word of God investigated ; but let this be always done, not in the way of controversy or spe- culation merely, but in the way of removing real dif- ficulties by casting light on the subject. This point, however, both tlie brethren of whom we are speaking, seem to have entirely missed. The papers of both sides are conceived in such dark and ambiguous lan- guage, the thoughts so illogically arranged, extraneous matters, particularly those of the self-vindicatory kind, which is made always to kecj) pace with the degree of * See Dr CaTUpbeU's Lectures on Systematic Theology and, Pulpit Eloquence, whence we have.trfinscribed the passage. An' author, whose works ought to be in the hand of every Christian given to disputation ; for, next to the Scriptures, his performan- ces, above all others we have ever seen, contain the best princi- ples of conduct in all such mallos. BY BOTH SIDES OF THE QUESTION. 30ii blame each attaches to his fellow, so permitted to entev the body of their arguments, that we are positively at a loss to say where they begin, or where they end. As it is not then for the mastery' we ought to write, so neither ought we to defend at all hazards those parti- cular tenets we may have espoused. Truth can never sufFer-by fair and open investigation. If we have been in the right formerly, all that our brethren can say, will but tend to confirm us the more In our views ; but if we have been in the wrong, let us not think it a dis- honour, but our bouiiden duty to acknowledge it freely. What other object ought Christians to have in viev/ but the pursuit after truth ? When we perceive twq parties opposing each other then, we may be fully as- sured that the truth does not rest with them both. But this very circumstance ought to create difiidence on all hands. It should set them isoth about searching and sifting the matter to the very bottom, and desiring iu good earnest that they may see the truth, that so they mai/ be one in Christ Jesus ; for it may be there is a flaw on the one side as well as on the other. And when the truth is thus discovered, they will noj need to charge each other to come over to his respective side ; for if such particular and impartial investigation were but fairly to be adopted, there would be ten thousand to one, if both should not be under the necessity in some respects of shifting his ground, and thus forming in a manner a mutual exchange. But alas I instead of thii rational mode of procedure in a work of so vabt im- portance, do we not behold many who have scarcely learned to lisp in mg,ttcrs of religion, setting themselves Up as geniuses of the profoundest knowledge, who had actually made a discovery of all that can be discovered, and the language of whose conduct virtually is, See, W^ exhibit before your eyes the whole of the infallible 304 RECIPROCAL CHARGES, &.C. standard of truth, and if ye do not conform to the pat- tern we show, it is because Christ's word hath no place in you ? Nor is this a disposition peculiar to one de- nomination of Christians merely, but it less or more pervades all denonainations, and is one of the grandest barriers in the way of Christian union and improve- ment. CIMPTER viir. OF THE MODE OF THE ORDINANCE, AND OF THE * SUBJECT OF RE-BAPTIZING. SECTION I. Of the mode of the Ordinance. JL HE state of the argument respecting this subject is as follows. Th€ one side conceive, that as ^vater is the element to be employed, and as the things signified by- it in the ordinance of baptism are frequently represent- ed in Scripture by the figurative language of 2}ourvig^ tprinilingy nvashitig^ Sec. ; $o, whichever of these modes be adopted, it comes to be a matter of comparatively small. importance, provided the grand and spiritual de- sign of the * ordinance be properly understood. Tlie other side, however, contend for the mode of immersion^ in opposition to all others, and allege that they demon- stratively prove their position from the derivation and use of the original word, and from the uniform practice of apostolic and primitive example. As it is not our intention, however, either to lead or to be led by mere assertions, we must accordingly examine these tenets in order to enable us to render a reason for whichever principle we may see it proper to coincide with. S06 OF THE MODE OF THE ORDINANCIL. We take it for granted then, that with regard to itie- design of the ordinance and the element to be employed^ there is no. difference on either side ; and that the only point of difference respects the manner in which this, element is to be applied, whether it is to be by im- mersion, washing, sprinkling, or pouring. The first, exclusively, is the opinion of all Baptists so far as we know, and, they adduce two arguments ia ^ particular in support of it. I. That it is the express. signification of the original word ; and 2dh/, that they have apostolic example for their conduct. As to the first of these, it will* be readily ad- mitted, that the original word /3x7rri^a> generally sig- nifies to dijOy plunge f or immerse. We say generally, for 'we have tlie authority of a very eminent lexicographer, (Parkhurst), who considers this signification as limited, and whose words are, after the definition just given, ' But in the New Testament it occurs not strictly in ' this sense, unless so far as this is included in sense * II. and III. below.' (which see). Dr Campbell, however, seems to restrict it entirely to this sense, and quotes Tertullian, the oldest of the Latin fathers, as rendering it by tingerSf the term used for dying cloth, which is by immersion * ; and in conformity to this, it is contended that the whole phraseology, in regard to this ceremony, concurs in evincing the same thing. The original "expression, it is said, is always baptizing in, or into a thing, and the baptized person is said to come up out of, ov from the water f. But though the definition of the woi'd to baptize may be as we have stated in a general se;ise, yet as applied to that religious ordinance instituted by our blessed. * Campbell on the Gospels, Matt. iii. 11. f M'Lcan's Commission, p. 109. Sec. OF THE MODE OF tflE ORfit^TA?fCK. 30? ibord, ttii&^ode is fltmceived to be incompatible with several examples recorded in Scripture. It is positively r q:! t oji as lo its general acceptation, but these cir- • 508 OF THE MCil)£ UI THE OKDINANCfi. Gumstances in particular cases, tend not a little to shake' lis in regard to its signification when applied to a reli- gious ordinance, and certainly demand another kind of solution than mere dogmatical assertions in regard to the etymology of the word. If etymology is to be fol- lowed, as one * justly remarks, it ought not to be re- stricted to this particular ordinance, but be equally ^ap- plied to other ordinances, in order to determine upon what grounds we proceed when we have recourse to this species of argument. The word AiiTDot, it has been observed, the term in the original employed to denote the ordinance of the supper, signifies difiillmesi, and fre- quently a feast or sumptuous entertainment. Thus it occurs Matt, xxiii. 6. Mark vl. 21. Lukexiv. 12. In the last quotation, it is indeed distinguished from legiyop, dinner, or meal eaten in the morning ; but here, as in the other passages, it evidently signifies a feast or en- tertainment. Now, if etymology,' or the literal signi- fication of a term is to be had recourse to for determin- ing subjects of this nature, will it not hence follow, that arguments drawn from the common use and acceptation of the word hiTrmt must be equally conclusive in direct- ing our practice in regard to the ordinance of the supper, as those drawn from the common acceptation of ficcTrn^a^ in regard to the ordinance of baptism ? And, therefore, reasoning on the former, in the manner which is com- monly done on the latter, we would hence have to con- clude, that in the ordinance of the supper we must po- sitively receive a full meal, for any thing short of this would not be coming up to the signification of the ori- ginal word JjiTTwy. Accordingly it appears that the church of Corinth understood it in this light. .But the apostle corrects the abuse into which they ran on thi^ ''^account, expressly declaring that such a practice as that * Pirif'5 Lfiterg to M'Lean, p. ISS. OF THE MODE OF THE ORDIN"AN'CE. '^Of «f indulging themselves in a full meal when met for the celebration of that ordinance, was not attending to it at all *. Although, therefore, we have not the same for- mal refutation of our brethren's reasoning on the word jSxTTTtl^tv^ yet the instances we have mentioned of l.lio eunuch, Cornelius, and the jailor, in our apprehension, create such difficulties as lead us to suspect that this word is not to be taken in its literal or common slgni- ficatipn, when applied to a religious ordinance, more than the other. ^ As to what Mr M'Lean says on the import and d^j- sign of baptism, we admit it to be ingenious, similar, indeed, to what Macknight has on the subject, and heartily agree with it, considered in the lii';ht of doc- trine. But as in our opinion, the passages he quotes from Rom. vi. and Col. il. wherein believers are repre- sented as being " buried with Christ in baptism," ought to be taken in a spiritual sense only, we hardly see how they can be in any respect conclusive in determining questions which regard the mode of that ordinance. It is evident, indeed, that the apostle's language is highly figurative in both these passages, and in the former ver. 5. it is manifest there is a mixture of metaphor, W to speak more properly, he employs two ve%u metaphors, expressive of the same general truth of which he had been speaking in the preceding verses, *' For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his deatli, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection." And so he says, chap. viii. 17. '•'• If so be that we suffer with him, that we may be :ilso gioriti^ togetlitr." Be- lievers are, by the prophet, called " Treci of rigli^t- ei.-usnesst?" therefore are they here said to be"planted." And still in conformity to the same pliraseology, Paul says of himself, J Cor. iii, 6. " I have planted, Apollps 510 OF THE MODE W THE ORiUKANCEi watered." And in the 9th verse of that chapter, lie again uses a mixture of metaphor^ and says to the Co* rinthians, " Ye are God's husbandrifi ye are God's build', ing." To be " planted," therefore, in the passage be- fore us, is to be made " Trees of righteousness", in the husbandry or vineyard of God. And as the death and interment of Christ, was not only a fit emblem of biiry-i ing seeds in the earth in order to their growth, bpt the sole cause, to preserve the metaphor, why any of the degenerate plants of a strange vine could be transplant- ed into this vineyard of God; they are therefore said to be *' planted together in the likeness of his'.deatli," that is to say, his death and interment not only prefigured their implantation as trees of righteousness into the spiritual vineyard of God, but they were, as the old di- vines used to say, the procuring cause of it. More* over, so intimate is the union between Christ and his people^ that all that hath happenied to him, may be con- sidered as happening to them. Hence the apostle pro- ceeds^ ver. 6. to declare that they were crucified with himv Then he remarks, ver. 8. that as crucified per- sons^ they are dead or died with him^ In like manner, he says of himself on this subject, GaL ii. 20. *' I am crucified with Christ, nevertheless I live, yet not I, but Christ liveth in me ; and the life which I now live iu the flesh, I live by the faith of the Son of God, Who loved me, and gave himself for me." Now, from all the expressions, as it has been justly remarked, to contend for the mode of literal immersion, on account of the apostle's saying in a spirituail sense^ that believers were buried with Christ by baptism ; i might be equally contended that they were literally crucified with him likewise, for it is impossible to shew that the one is more figurative than the other. The following note from Dr MacknigKt, in my opi- OF '5iHE MODE OF THEGRDINANCEi SW fiion, sols this whole subject in a pretty clear light, * Believers being considered as members of Christ's * body on account of the intimate union which subsists * between them and him, every thing happening to him, * is in Scripture said to have happened to them. Thus ' the Jews are said to he put to death in the body of Christ *, ' and our old man is said to be crucified with Christy * Koin,'. vi. 6. J and we are said to have died together ' ivi0 Christy ver. 8. and to be buried together with him * bi/ bnfiiismy ver. 4. and to be dead with Christ from the ''.elemenl^; of the world. Col. ii^^SO. and to be risen with ^ £^risi^ Eph. ii. 4, — 6. and even to be circutncised with ' aJirJst, Col. ii. 11. on which account, believers of all * nations are called tte^/to^^, the circumcision, Philip, iii. 3. * Th^se expressions the apostle took, great delight in, * because they make us sensible that Christ became * man, wus circuaicised, crucified, and buried, and rose *' again to deliver us from punishment, and to procure ' for us a blessed resurrection to immortality. Mo/c ' particularly, as Christ suffered death for us, we are ' said to have been actually/ jjut to death in hii/i.^ U-pon the whole then, if the things we have stated are not convincing to the mind, we must just remark, that we leave this kind of dispute to those vv^ho have more liking to it than we have, or rather to some more friendly' hand who will endeavour to remove our dif- ficulties ; for to speak the truth, though we are not opposed to the idea of immersion having been practised in primitive times, yet we can by no means perceive this to have been the case so universally, as not to have our difficulties on the subject. The tliree instances we have specified — the contrasting of /SuTrrt^M with hi7rv«v — and the apostle's meaning in the passages we have been * The place whence t^is fjuotation iS" taken is Rom. vii^^^ ^ote 2. # SJ2 OF THE M«DE OF THE ORDINANCE. jus^t considering, present difficulties in our view which at least demand attention. Nor will they be" removed by a round of dogmatical assertions respecting the ori- ginal word, for here, we should presume, we have heard all that can be said. Nor would even other well authenticated instances, which, however, we shall re- joice to see brought forward, altogether remove our scruples on this point, for these particular cases ought, in a rational manner, to be accounted for by themselves, without having recourse to the puerile and pitiable shifts, into which some, through the heat of their zeal of ha- ving things to be in that particular manner they would like, have been betrayed. In the case of the eunuch^ for instance, if it cannot be proved from geographical accounts, histories or travels, ancient or modern, that there was a i-iver, or other natural collection of water in the place where he is said to have been baptiz.cd, of sufficient capacity for the immersion of the body, wc really do not think it justifiable to attempt the solution of the difficulty upon the principle which some have done, namely, that the rivulet might have been dammed. Tins would have been fine work ! would it not ? for Philip and the eunuch ? And how unlike to the work of kim, who, in another ordinance, no less sacred, made a very i>\xvAi portion of the elements employed, repre- sent to the soul all the rich provisions of his heavenly grace ! Though it be contended that bajptisni by im- mersion was emblematical of, the death, burial, and re- surrection of Christ, &.C. yet we may be assured that its emblematical signification, even though administer- ed in this way, could not be understood unless the mind had been informed respecting it. If, therefore, it re- quired instruction in order to understand its true nature and design, the accuracy of idees respecting it, must iather have depended on the accuracy of the instructio!>& OF THE MODE OF THE ORDINANCE. SIS afforded, than on anj mode, be what that might, of ad- ministering the ordinance. The bread and wine, in like manner, in the ordinance of the supper, are emblema- tical of the broken body and shed blood of the Kedeerii- er ; yet it is not the mere act of partaking of bread and wine, in what manner soever this may be done, but the idea in the mind as the result of instruction, that can put u? in possession of proper conceptions respecting it. It is therefore our belief at present, and must con- tinue to be so till we shall see the contrary proved in a *** sober and rational manner, that the eunuch, Cornelius, and the jailor, and those connected with them, were baptized by some other mode than that of immersion ; nor can we conceive that they would have been at any loss, notwithstanding, as to the grand and spiritual de- sign of this ordinance, considering that they were under the immediate tuition of apostles and other inspired men. Instruction by ordinances are like parables, and parables again are like verbal hieroglyphics, and though all of them are admirably calculated to convey instruction in the strongest possible manner, yet do they require a key in order to understand them. As, therefore, the person would be but trifling, who would attempt to ac- count for every circimistance in a parable, and not only trifling, but pursuing the very plan which would effec- tually prevent him from seeing its grand design ; so, we find it impossible to separate a similar idea from bur minds, in regard to those who seern to lay such a stress on the mode of this ordinance, as if what Christ requir- ed, and what he designed by it, could not be obtained' but by attending to it in a certain manner. Now, our brethren will please observe, that if the Scriptures re- present this subject in that strong, important, and con- vincing point of view which they would inculcate if""" ' 814" OF THE MODE OF THE ORDINANCE,. US, we shall be eiceedinglj obliged to them if they would only produce the proof, that we may dlstin-i guish between the voice of man and the voice of God in this particular ; and we trust, that if they make it appear that the Scriptures inculcate those things they so strenuously insist oh, we shall not be backward to obey the heavenly mandate. Upon the whole then, the reader will easily per- ceive from what has been said, that we cannot but de- plore the taunting and scoffing air which some have as- sumed on this subject, in regard to the oilier modes which many Christians have conceived it their duty to practise — scoffing at the terms sprinklings pourings &c. as if they were not terms employed by the Holy Spi- rit, to signify the operation of his benign and heavenly- grace upon the heart of his people. SECTION II. Of the subject of Re-haptizing. XjLere, we are aware, that our brethren the Baptists., will be ready to condemn this iiiquiry from its very title, for we know it is strongly alleged that nothing is Christiaii baptism, but what accords with their view of the subject. We hope, however, they will give us credit when we say, that it is not in order that we may differ from theitiy but in order that we may investigate and determine for ourselves, that ever we thought of r.->n^idering this matter here. OF THE SUBJECT OF RE-BA?TIZING. 3ii5 Respecting this subject, we remarked elsewhere, that it is an initiatory, appointed to be administered to the disciples of the Lord Jesus immediately upon their con- version to the faith of his gospel. The baptism of John even did not differ in this respect. His was the bap- tism of repentance, and hence we read *' that there went out unto him all the land of Judea, and they of Jerusa- lem, and were baptized of hi:n in Jordan, confessmg their sirts *." The confession of sins was necessary in order to his baptism, and invariably wherever such confessions were made, such penitents were straightway baptized. As the harbinger of the^Lord, he preached to the peo- ple, " Repent ye, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand," and whosoever gave credit to his doctrine, were there- upon baptized into the profession of it, confessing their sins. The apostles of our Lord went upon precisely the same plan. The three thousand who were convert- ed on the day of Pentecost, were baptized and added io \he chMvchXhQ self-same claif\. And the same was also the case with the eunuch, Cornelius, Lydia, and the jailor, Paul himself, and those whom he baptized, the Ephesian elders, and in short, all who received the word during the whole period of the apostles' ministry. Im- mediately upon their reception of the doctrine of ths apostles, they had this ordinance administered to them as an initiatory rite, by which they were introduced in- to the profession of the belief of certain truths which they had never either believed, or professed to believe previously. Thus it is manifest, that baptism, as prac- ti'.ed by the aposUes, was the grand initiatory rite-^bv which the newly converted made their iirst public avowal of their belief of the doctrines of the gospel, and professed themselves to be disciples of him who U^'' * Matt.iii.5. Mark i, 5. f Acts ii. 4.1. 31^ OF THE SUBJECT OF RE-B Al'TIZ/NG. died for their sins, and risen again for their justification^ and who had received all power in heaven and in earth, that as the great Head of his church, he might regulate and govern it. Since then, baptism, in the days of the apostles, was uniformly administered to neivly converted persons, and to such oiilyt it comes to be a subject of no inconsider- able importance to ascei;ain whether, in the case of those who have been known for many years to have professed the Christian faith in a consistent and irre- proachable manner, it ought to be again administered ^up — ^-~z\r views coming t^ be changed in respect of this ordinance. And here It Is lo be taken for granted, that if it had so happened, that their mind had been rightly informed in respect of this point at the period of their conversion, they would have willingly sub- mitted to it. But this not having been the case, till ten, twenty, or perhaps thirty years from that period had been suffered to elapse, would the receiving of baptism under such circumstances then, be at all si- milar to the instances we have in the Scriptures ? Or rather, would it not be giving a false representation of this ordinance, and be rather apparently baptizing men into baptism itself^ than into the faith of doctrines they had so long professed ? Here then, for we must express our sentiments freely, here lies the chief difHculty with us. We find it impossible for us to separate from the idea of baptizing under such circumstances, the idea of giving the lie to the whole of one's former profession, and of beginning entirely anew, as i£ he had known or professed to know nothing of Christianity before. If baptism is an initiatory ordinance, how is it possible to initiate a perton into the profession of that which he has for many years actuallv pi;ofessed already ? Nor i^ OF THE SUBJECT OF RE-BAPTIZING. 3L7 it mere profession in behalf of which we are here con- tending. The character we have more immediately in view, is that of a person who has professed Christianity not merdy in the -vague sense of the word, in which whole nations have been considered as Christians, but as a true and sincere follower of th^ Lord, and oac wlu> is desirous in every thing to do only that which is pleas- ing in his sight. This is the person of whom we arc speaking, and the point to be determined respecting him is, whether he is to be re-baptized upon the change ot his views respecting this ordinance being administered to infants. This indeed, is what he once held to be proper, but now. he considers it as not so, therefore he desists from it. Is this not therefore enough ? IVIust he not only give up the baptizing of his children, but be baptized himself, and thus declare publicl}^, if the ordinance has any meaning, that all his former profes- sion was fallacious and vain ? ' But here we are aware it will be asked, was then this person of whom you speak ever baptized ? Did he ever receive Christian baptism ? we mean that bap- tism enjoined by Christ and his apostles in the New Testament ? We are aware also, that supposing these questions should be answered in the affirmative, it will be immediately replied. Then the Scripture teaches ///- fa7it baptism ! Now, as we consider this objection to bi; nothing less than a mere quirk, so it must be answered accordingly. In our turn, we must say to such an ob- jector, then, upon your principle, do not the Scriptures teach that a person should be baptized fourteen, twenty ox thirty years ""'after he has been converted? If the Scriptures do not teach infant baptism, we are certain that neither do they teach nor afford an instance of bap- tism being administered in such circumstances as these. As therefore, in our opinion, to assert the last would 5l8 OF THE SUBJECT OF Rii-BAPtlZtNCJ. be equally as unscriptural as to assert the_;?rj-/^the onlv difficulty with us comes accordingly to be, which of these two practices ought then to be adopted ? As to that of re- baptizing in the circumstances we have sup- posed, we do not perceive how we could be exempted from the charge of exceeding the bounds of scriptural example ; so we are of opinion, that the only evil to be rectitied, is that of .baptizing our children, and that to refrain from this whenever we are convinced of its un- scriptural nature, is both the best way for persons in our circumstances of manifesting our regard for the authority of Christ, and of striking at the root, of the evil which has got in amongst us. And it is because the other plan seems both to do more than the word of God warrants, or the nature of the subject requires, Tnat we have entered into our present train of reason- ing in this place. In addition to those evils already mentioned, of go- ing beyond due^ bounds in regard of scriptural example, as well as giving a false representation of the ordinance itself, there is another great and important evil of which it is necessarily a cause, and that is, divisions among the people of God. When a person who is a member of a church of Christ comes to be baptized, after he has pro- fessed the gospel for a number of years, his baptism, in the nature of the thing, does not so properly initiate him into the profession of the Christian faith, as into a profession of a different kind, and which seems to con- sist chiefly in constituting a difference between him and the brethren with whom he was formerly connected. Thus, while it seems to do nothing more satisfactory, does it lay a foundation for extending and still protract- ing the horrible evil of even real Christians dividing and separating from one another. It thus gives occa- sion for men to range themselves under .different lead • OF THE SUBJECT OF RE-BAPTI2INO. 311> c.rs, and to call them&elves by dllFcrent names, bjr which tli^ may be distinguished the one from the other, but which, according to the apostle's determination of such subjects, is a certain indication that they are so far car- nal *, 1 Cor. iii. 4. And what is a consequence ever to be lamented in such cases, is, the exultation and triumph manifested by both parties in proportion as cither of them may gain over proselytes to thqir re- spective sides. On these accounts we therefore con- ceive, that for persons in such a situation, when they come to have their views changed in regard to infant baptism, it would be acting fully as scripturally, and vastly more in conformity to their Christian profession, for them merely to refrain from baptizing their chiU dren, for this would be removing to all intents and purposes the grand source of the error, and would be laying a foundation for bringing all matters right, while at the same time the other evils would be avoided, ia the course of a very few years. We repeat it again, however, that we have no ex- pectation, but that this reasonable mode of procedure will be violently opposed by such as assume too high grounds in regard to this subject, and who seem to imagine every thing concerning it to be clear and de-- * It has been with much regret that, in the course of this in- quiry, we have been under the i\ecessity of conforming to the estabUshed custom of distinguishing between Christians by differ- ent names. If our sense could have been equally understood, the reader may rest assured that he would not have been troubled with the terms Baptist or Pedo-baptUt, as epithets which distinguish some of the people of God : Nor hav« we regard for the one terra more than for the other, for it is not as Baptists or Pedo -baptists, that wc wish to know Christians, but as persons who have tasted that the Lord is gracious, and amongst whom, through whose marvellous loving kindness, there exists the moit endearing ani jndi83olu"blc uniou. 3^0 OF THE SUBJECT OF RE-BAPTIZING. monstrable truths. As we have no inclination to enter the list of combatant with anj, however, all we would ask of them therefore is, that if they would shew us from Scripture either an example or precept for the baptizing of persons in such a situation, we shall thank, them for the information ; and till some such clear and irrefragable evidence is produced, it is hoped that Chris- tians will in this matter think and act deliberately, without suffering themselves to be hurried into a prac- tice which, at best, is equally as doubtful as that they may be at present pursuing. If our brethren can cast any light on the subject, their debtors we shall con- sider ourselves for so doing. But should we see reason for differing from them still, we do not perceive how, we would be giving any just grounds of offence, as we are certain our conscience blears us witness that we do not deal thus in req;ard to them. I APPEN 1>1 X. OF CHUrSTlAN UXITY AND FORBEARAXCl. P4RT I. Of General Principles. VV HAT attentive observer is there, who is not stuug to the very heart with all the unhappy differences which exist among the people of God ? The number of sect^ and parties into which they are divided, is almost infi- nite. And what is worse, like the Jews and Samaritan>; of old, they will have no intercourse with one another. They more nearly resemble the independent states of the ancient Greeks, among which were perpetual con- tentions and discords, than that one body of redeemed sinners, which the Scriptures represent them as consti- tuting. Does church history consist of any thing else almost, but the doleful detail of the lamentable dif- ferences, the mutual and mean jealousies, and the hos- tile-like conduct of the professed followers of the Lamb ? As in societies formed upon maxims merely of human policy, so here, we behold one party rising- on the ruins of another, and this, after having flourish- ed for a season, is found to give place to a more power- ful foe, Ss S22 OF GENERAL PRINCIPLES. To trace the various serpentine courses into whicli Christians have wandered in the violence of their oppo- sition one to another, would be a work as extensive as it would be foreign to our present purpose. "^ All that we intend to do, therefore, is to examine a few of the principles which must necessarily have given rise, as ■well as still continue, to protract this great and crying evil. That Christians are necessarily to be conformed to each other in fwry-respect, is a position we must set out with doubting, as we see nothing analogous to it in any of the other works of God. When we inquire into the world of nature, and arrange the various ma- terials with which she furnishes us into their respective classes and orders, though we indeed perceive such ge- neral marks of agreement between them, as sufliciently to justify the propriety of our conduct in regard to this point, yet still, when they are more minutely consider- ed, such differences will he found, as manifestly to .dis- tinguish each individual from all the rest of its order. So that, if men were foolish enough to proceed upon the same rule here, that many affect to do in regard ta religion, instead of classifying, they should divide and subdivide, not to say every class, but every individual of every class, into the minutest principles, and the re- sult would be found, that no two particles were exact- ly alike. But because of this variety, are they there- fore void of utility ? Or would any man be so foolish as to reject the provision with which the preat .\uthor of nature provides him, such as food and raiment, be- cause they did not come up to his wild and preposterous notions of absolute uniformity ? Bilt in matters relating merely to the present life, men conduct themselves more like rational beings than in matters, of religion. Though objects are thus varied. OF GENERAL PRINCIPLES. 323 ^ n the world of nature, yet no person ever thinks of casting out with his neighbour on this account. Every individual has his own particular make and conforma- tion of body. There are not two faces alike, two hand- writinops, two tones of voice in different individuals; and yet jwe never heard of any so absurd as to be displea- sed with his friend, because that in these respects he was not framed and modelled entirely after his likeness. Do we not find also a variety as to sex, complexion, taste and size ? Yea, do not naturalists tell us, that there are not two hairs, two leaves, two piles of grass, two atoms of any description, when reduced to their ultimate, their elementary particles, that perfectly agree ? Would not the demand of uniformity in these respects therefore, be a demand utterly to annihilate the whole universe to a single individual, yea, more, to a single atom of that individual ? Now since the glorious works of niature are thus va- ried, and since this endless variety is of itself the stamp which they all bear of their great Original, shall meh^ Christian men too, ever think of altering this admira- ble order which their Father and their God has consti- tuted in the universe ? Or is it in any respect to be wondered at, that our minds, faculties which are in a manner beyond our controul, should not be exactly alike, since our bodies are thus fearfully and wonder- fully constructed, and since all nature bears the equally paradoxical stamp of its first great Cause, variety and *harmony ? Nor can we imagine that these admirable evidences of the finger of God will terminate here. Could we take a glance into the world of spirits, and contemplate the glories of that state, should we not there behold the most striking analogy in this respect to all that we now see or hear ? As love and affection, emanating from the throne of God, and published' to; S24- OF GENERAL PRINCIPLlii. guilty men in the gospel of his Son, is the only centre of union iri the church here below ; so is it expressly the same principle vyhich knits all hearts into one in the temple above. But as the objects of their contem- plation are infinite, and as all have not the same facul- ties, nor have made the same progress in research, there must be diversities, and harmonious discords, so to speak, though still all under the operation of one and the same spirit. Were men mere machines indeed, or brute creatures, destitute of the rational faculties, the scheme of redu- cing all to one uniform rule in every respect, might probably succeed. But as well deprive us of life alto- gether, as, with this invaluable blessing, and with the other, which is even more so, attempt to reduce us all to the standard of any individual. To be capable of thinking is our glory as men, and tp think soberly, that is to say, to think as the word of God directs, without at the same time imposing our individual views, even of divine truth, upon the consciences of our brethren, is our glory as Christians. But it may be said, if every individual has thus a li- berty of thinking for himself, is there at all any likeli- hood that the jarrings, discordances, and divisions in the church of God, will ever come to an end ? Now, supposing we were not able to answer in the affirma- tive, what then ? Must we therefore not think at all, because we may perchance think differently from our brethren ? But supposing again that men could be found so mean, and so entirely destitute of every principle of religion and common sense, as to conform to this de- mand, still, we ask, to what length would you wish to' carry it ? Who are the persons you would have to walk i^t liberty, and who would you thus fetter hands and feet, that you might do with them whatsoever thou OF GENERAL PRINCIPLES. -'--' acred text is loo glaring to be passed over in silence. It occurs in Amos iii. 3. aad it is a difference between Jehovah hira&elf and his people Israel, and not any difTerences between his people among theipselves, which is there mentioned, though this last be the: general,' and almost the exclusive application of the passage. And even here it is applied so very vaguely, that it may be made to signify every thing or nothing. When brethren differ in respect of any thin|[ alinosl, fohl it is contended there must be a separation, For how cati t\y-o walk together except they are agreed ? Well, sinCe you wish to know, Paul tells you how it can be done. Respectmg pctsonal differences he says, " Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy tsnd beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleucss of mind. OF GENERAL PRINCIPLES. 331 known, that we do not charge one particular sect more than another with this improper conduct ; for the evil, alas ! has spread far and wide, so that individuals en- joy not the liberty of thinking for themselves, or if they- do, and happen to think differently from their bre- thren, they are exposed to the danger of being exclud- ed their society. meekness, long-suffering, forbearing one another, and forgiving one another ; if any man have a quarrel against any, even as Christ forgave you, so also do ye," Col. iii. 12, 13. Or if they are differ- ences respecting modes and forms of worship. Sec. read what he says in the xiv. chapter of his epistle to the Romans. Yea, when divisions or schisms were runnhig very high in the church at Co- rinth, one saying he was of Paul, another of Apollos, and a third of Cephas, and so on, he quashes all their altercations, by exhort- ing them to live at peace and harmony with one another, 1 Cor» J. 10. A P P E N I> i X. PART iJ, Of Particuliir Prlndplei. Xn farther prosecuting the present subject, our refles- tions will be chiefly of two kinds. The one regarding the principles upon which individuals ought to unite, and so forming societies or churches. The other, the principles upon which such societies or churches ought to recognize one another. Respecting tha first, the belief of the confession of Peter, namely, ** That Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God," is positively all that is required of the sinful children of men to a full and complete title to all the blessings of the gospel. *' Whosoever belie veth that .Tesus is the Christ is born of God," saith the apostle John, " and every one that loveth him that begat, loveth him also that is begotten of him *.*' Thus we perceive that the union of Christians is as natural as it is endearing. In the very nature of the thing* love to the members must keep pace with our degree of * 1 John V. 1. OF i-ARtlCULAR PRIl^CIPLES. 2?)'3 love to the head ; for if we indeed love him who begat, we cannot but love them who are begotten of him. Now, how does love operate ? Surely not by standing at a distance from, or by biting and cicvouring one ano- tlier. " Love workcth no ill to his neighbour," Rom. xiii. 10. " It doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked," 1 Cor. xiii, 5. ♦' A righteous man is merciful even to his beast, wiicrc- as th« tender mercies of the W'icl;ed are crQel," Frov. xii. 10. But we speak not here of the difference be- tween the righteous and the wicked, but of the one spirit of love, tenderness, and sypipathy which must ne- cessarily pervade the children of God in all ages and climates. As the blessed Saviour is universal Lord, su all the saved in every age and nation, own hira to b;^ such. They love him" with tlieii* whole hearts, and it is in a manner inseparable from their very being to have any Oliver principle ^j:egaixi to tiieir brethren. Love lo him who begat, makes the heurtof Christians through- out all the world vibrate in the most perfect harmon v, with love to those alio who are begotten of him. But we remark farther, that the principle of Chris- tian union is not only natural in itself, but that the Sci-iptures afford such abundant evidence in support of it, as really to evince that there must be no little cri- minality on the head of those who would dare to op-, pose it. Not to mention the sentiment of our Lord in regard to the man who was prohibited by his disciples from casting out demons, we would refer to his own in- tercessory prayer, as the most indubitable evidence on this head. ** Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also who shall believe on me through their word, that they all may be one, as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that the world may believe that thou hast sent me," John xvii. 20,21. As nothing can be more 534- OF PARTICULAR rRIXCIPLitS. evident tlian that it was the design of the Saviour that there should subsist the most perfect harmouy among his followers, so, the reason assigned for it is such as ought to be deeply impressed upon the heart of all. The reason is nothing less than that of an evidence of his divine mission to the world thalt lieth in "vvickedness. Hence it follows, that wherever there is an opposite conduct to this design of the Saviour, his authority is not only disregarded, but the world is deprived of a privilege to which they havq « right by the seal of Hea- ven, and wliich, by the blessing of God, might be con- ducive to their conversion, in the early ages of the gospel, the affection manifested by Christians toward one another, made the world tu take knowledge of them, and to conclude that they had been with Christ. But alas I it is so very different in the present day, that it comes to be a problem well worthy of discussion, whe- ther there is any likelihood that it ever shall be other- ■wise. To trace the causes and origin of this evil, and to state the principles from which Christians must have swerved when they began to wallf in devious paths of their own, seem to bid the fairest 'for its solution. Tlie principal cause which ftmst have given rise, as well as protracts the differences amongst Christians, Hi our view, is that of an intoleranee'of spirit whereby they will not allow each to think for himself, but con- demn and anathematize one another with the most un* relenting severity, not unfrequently 'magnifying the veriest trifles as if they were the grossest errors ; and hence they conceive themselves warranted to separate and stand aloof from those very persons with v;hom they are one after all, in the bonds of the gospel. We are aware that this conduct mustfcave taken its rise on ac-* count of principles hviAing been introduced into the OF PARTICULAR PRINCIPLES. ' 33S eliurch, to which, some could, not give their assent. Now, as there were exanipJcs of this nature even in the days of the apostles, we would do well to attend to the manner in which such matters were "treated by those infallible guides. It is to be particularly observed, that every error veas not placed upon the same, J.evel, nor was the same line of conduct to be pursued toward every aggressor. In relation to this subject, Jude* says ex- pressly, *' Of some have compassion, making a difl'er- ence, and others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh." The dift'erence here enjoined by Jude, in regard to the treatment of offenders, is doubtless^qilnlly applicable to errors whether of sentiment or of conduct, ou which, account we must trace a few examples, in order as much as possible to come at precision on this point. As to errors of conduct then, throughout the whole of Scripture, and especially the apostolical epistles, gross immorality, indeed, is uniformly condemned with the greatest severity. But a person might be chargeable with other species of misconduct, ■so as even to be inarked by the brethren, and they charged to *' have no company with him, and yet he was not to be accounted as an enemy, but admonished as a brotherf ." So, in like manner, differences of sentiment in sorae cases were not permitted to have the smallest place ^ but Christians were to separate from those who were not of the 5am.e mind in this respect. We shall err most egre- giously, however, if we suppose this to have been the case universally. On the contrary, there were, and might be many differences in respect of sentiment, and yet Christians were not to separate, but to go on with their brethren with whom they were united in other respects. What then is the precise point of distinction between « Yer. 22, 23. t 2 Thess. iii. 11, \5. 336 OF PARTICULAp. PKISVIPLES. these two classes of difference of sentiment ? Just the old distinction between essentials and non-ess »}ttialsy if the captiousness of the present times did not decrj all sucli distinctions as erroneous and unscriptural. But as we feel no itch for such terms more than that they are the signs of ideas, so if we can convey our meaning equally Avithout them, we most willingly let them go. Of the first kind of difference of sentiment, is that, of ■jvhich the apostle John speaks in his second epistle, ver. 10. saying to the elect lady and her children, " If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed.'* The ||pcj|ine concerning which this supposed messenger might be lacking, was, as we learn from the seventh and ninth verses, the doctrine concerning Christ, *' For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is conxe in the flesh." '* Beloved," says the same apostle, 1 epist. iv. 1. " be- lieve not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God, because many false prophets are gone out into the world. Hereby know ye the spirit of God : every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is of God ; and every spirit that confes- seth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is nat.tof God," On the same score of erroneous sentiments, Peter speaks of some who should " privily bring in damnable heresies," 2 Pet. ii. 1 . ; and Paul says in writing to Titus, chap. iii. 10. " A man that is an heretic, after the first and second admonition, reject.'* Now, what were those destructive heresies of which PetjCr speaks ? They consisted in a " denying even of the Lord that bought them." Thus, therefore, Peter evidently agrees with the apostle John, and both fully authorize Chris- tians to have no manner of religious fellowship with OF PARTICULAR PRINCIPLES. f.ST ••^acli as cither " deny that Christ is come in the flesh," or who would rob him of his divine character, which is indeed th* principal gem of his. crown. But this is a verj diiFerent cause of separation from the generality of those upon which Christians in ' the present day insist. In truth it is not a separation amongst Christians thenr* selves, but merely a separation between them and such as have no manner of right, on accoimt of the principles they hold, to assume the name. Paul, in his second letter to Timothy, chap. iii. 1, — 5. describes another set of characters from whom he commands Christians to turn away. In his letter to the Romans, chap. xvi. 17. he earnestly entreats that the persons who cause divisions, contrary to the apostolic doctrine, should be carefully avoided. Concerning the false teachers in the churches of Galatia, he says, Gal. v. 12. " I would they were even cut off which trouble you." The Philippians he exhorts in the following manner. " Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the concision," chap. iii. 2. And to the Co- lossians he writes, " Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ." The apostle Jude, in like manner, ver. 19. makes mention of certain characters who even separated themselves from the fellowship of the sainlSi And what kind of characters were they ? They we're siich as the saints must have separated from their societies, had they not gone away of their own acfcotd. *' These be th«y who separate themselves, sensual, having not the spirit." But stili aH this does not come up to what we see practised in the present day. Again, when we turn to what the apostle Paul says, 2 Cor. vi. 17. or the apostle John in regard to the apo- calyptic Babylon, we still find separation urged upon Uu 8SS OF PARTICULAR PRINCIPLES. one and the same principle. Paul indeed describes what he means by *' separating" in the 17th ver. by exhorting the Corinthians, ver. 14. " Not to be un- equally yoked together with unbelievers ; for what feU lowship," saith he, " hath righteousness with unright- eousness ? and what communion hath light with dark- ness ? and what concord hath Christ with Belial ? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel ? and what agreement hath the temple of God with iduls " for ye are the temple of the living God, as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them, and I will be their God, and tj^iey shall be luj people." " Wherefore come out from among ^.them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing, and I will receive you, and will be a Father un- to you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty *." The voice from heaven, which John describes, in like manner, assigns a similar rea- son for the exhortation, *' Come out of her, my peo- ple," Rev. xviii. 4. It was for the sake of not par- taking of her sins^ that they might avoid her punish- ment. Now, what were the sins of this mystical har- lot ? This is a,n important question, and as we shall have further occasion for it by and by, we wish it to be par- ticularly attended to. Let it be then observed, that there were not only innumerable sins of the most gross and immoral nature, but as if, all these were not enough, there was the sin of enslav'nig the souls cf uicn; But after all, when we compare this with wljat we see in the present day, there appears to be no analogy in tlic smallest. It is not Christians separating from Chris- tians which we here behold, but from spiritual tyrants —from a system which makes merchandize "of the souls of men, by the sale of indulgences — a systerrj * 2 Cor. vi. 11,-18. OF PARTICULAR PRINCIPLES* 339 xvhich is wrong in its -very foundation, regarding another besides Christ as its great Head — a system, in short, which takes away the key of knowledge from the peo- ple, and which places on a level with the divinely in- spired oracles, their own dogmas, most of which are <:vidently the product of men of corrupt minds. These are some of the things for which Christians are exhort- ed to *' come out of her ;" and is not separation in such circumstances most essential indeed ? Thus we perceive, that neither on account of setrtL ment on the one hand, or of conduct on the other, were professing Christians to regard it as a light matter in separating from one another. The examples of the first kind which we have seen, regard what have not improperly been termed, as already observed, the es- sentials Qi religion, that is to say, doctrines, the denial of which unchristianizes a person altogether ; so that this in the apostles' account was the grand, the sole rea- son why a man was either received, retained, or ex- cluded from the society of the godly. Conformity to one another in matters such as these was absolutely in- dispensable ; and if there was not confornaity to one ano- ther here, it was on account of nothing less than want of conformity, one or other of them, to the image of God in the spirit of their mind. Bjit it will be said, if there is to be a separation on account of such matters, will not this in its very nature lay a foundation for a difference among Christians ? To which we would reply. Yes, it may among profes- sing Christians, but not amongst those who are Chris- tians in deed and in truth. Amongst these, there can be no difference, as happily there is none, in regard to such important matters. These are matters most surely- believed by them all, yea, and upon the belief of which i< their whole claim to the Christian character suspend- 340 OF PARTICULAR PRINCIPLES^ ed. Wherever we behold a person, therefore, denyliTg as the Jews do, that the Messiah is come, or that he is truly and properly God as well as man, as many have impiously done, such characters cannot be reckoned as having any title to the appellation of Christians, for iu truth they are not. Supposing then, that true Chris- tians should either themselves separate, or expel such from their society, and that such should form a society by themselves under the same name, yet this could not be reckoned as constituting two distinct Christian communities ; for the truth is, tlie one should be hold- ing principles which are subversive of Christianity al- together, and therefore, to be consistent with them- selves, they ought to' give up all connection with the title of course. It may be further said, that if ^uch communities as have been supposed were but once to exist, is it not possible that real Christians miight mingle with them ; and therefore, if the separation contended for were to take place, would not this be constituting a difference among the people of God ? In answer to this, however, it ought to be observed, that though the possibility of real Christians being to be found in such circumstances be fully admitted, yet tiiat they can allow themselves such liberties as flowing from a mind properly inform- ed in respect of the tenets of those with whom they as- sociate, seems most doubtful indeed. It is essential to the character of a Christian, for instance, to acknow- ledge the God-head of Christ ; yet for want of con- necting this part of the Christian system with the system of those with whom a Christian may associate, it is possible that he may be found amongst men who deny this fundamental article. Again, in order to have correct notions of the kingdom of Jesus Christ, it is essential to view it as wholly spiritual, and completely OF PARTICULAR PRINCIPLES. 341 distinct from the kingdoms of this world ; but for want of attending to this speciality of character in his king- dom, it is possible that Christians may be found con- nected with a system which blends the two together. Likewise, to acknowledge the supremacy of Christ as the head of all things to the church, is essential to our entertaining proper ideas of the high characti^r he sus- tains ; but for want of connecting this part of Llie Chris- tian faith with the pretensions of th.e popish hieiarcliy, it is possible for Christians to be found even in the bo- som of the man of sin, " who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worship- ped, so that he, as God, sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God **'' But it is a question which is stirely not difficult of solving, whether, if they understood their own systems, could they any longer remain in them ? Because, were we to answer in the negative, there is little doubt but we should be right, for it seems impossible that the sheep of Christ, who hear his voice, should have any hesitation of relinquishing a situation at his heavenly direction ; and the more so, when they would perceive that by their remaining in it, they would be giving their assent to doctrines or practices which are so evi- dently subversive of bis revealed will. Werd it al- lowable for a person to give his own experience on a subject of this nature, we could say m regard to esta- blishments, this being the only case of the three in- stances we have specified in which we have been con- cerned, that it would be impossible for us now to have any longer connection with them ; and this, not so much on account of the corruption which exists in those churches, for corruption, alas I may exist in any churcli, but because in their very constitution they coi.nect the * 2Thc<^.ii.|. 342 OF PARTICULAR PRINCIPLED. kingdoms of this world with the kingdom of our bles-' sed Lord ; a circumstance which requires no strength of reasoning, but simply attention to this one passage, " My kingdom is not of this world," to see how very unscriptural and inimical to real religion all such systems must be. To separate from such societies therefore, is not properly speaking separating from churches of Christ, for as Christ's kingdom is not of this world, so- cieties such as these, which blend the two together, mu^' needs be some other thing than that spiritual and hea- venly kingdom he came to erect. But though separation in respect of such unscriptural systems is not only allowable, but most important and proper for the maintaining of his religion pure and en- tire, yet tills is still a very different thing from that of Christians separating from one another about matters which are of a far more doubtful nature. Before the tenets we have specified can be at all admitted, the whole of the New Testament would behove to be new modelled ; but certainly differences in respect of other things which are not incompatible with any part of re- vealed truth, ought not to be placed on the same level. In the New Testament indeed, such points of difference are frequently alluded to ; but not in a single instance can it be shewn that Christians might lawfully separate from each other in retrard to thfem. In the Corinthian church, for instance, there were several differences of this nature ; and as they arc particularly treated by an inspired apostle, we cannot do better than exanhiine these, in order to arrive at certainty in regard to the line we ought to pursue. And here, without going in quest of something of our own to say, we would rather take the liberty of inserting a few of Dr Campbell's sentiments on schism^ as being at least as well adapted to our pre- sent purpose as any thing we could devise. OF PARTICULAR PRINCIPLES. 34:5 That eminent author, after shewing from several pas- sages in the gospel by John, that the word Zx^